|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 Likes: 136
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 Likes: 136 |
Quote:
Quote:
The real hypocrisy in all of this is those lambasting Gordon, but remaining mum on the Manziel dollar bill scandal. I'm sure Manziel knows about the penalties of being caught too, so where's the cry for suspension there? That's hypocritical.
Missed this nugget. Can't say I disagree.
Sorry I missed the part that he was actually caught doing something. Last I saw rolling a bill is not a crime legally or morally. And spare me the naive stuff. He wasn't caught doing a thing wrong!
Jmh...err no opinion at all just FACT!
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 69
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 69 |
Quote:
Quote:
Strike 1 when he entered the league
Strike 2 – Weed as a rookie
Strike 3 – Codeine
Strike 4 – Weed that he is appealing.
no. he said #4 was the suspend stage. Codeine is a drug so that should be #4 not #3?
I assume he was referring to the year long suspension.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,999 Likes: 369
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,999 Likes: 369 |
Quote:
Can Josh take this to court? If he gets the year?
Sherman was on ecord saying that he was going to go to court if he had lost on his suspension.
The problem is that it takes so long to get a court date, that he could miss half the year before he gets a court date, trial, and verdict, and the other half on appeal.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Quote:
Quote:
Strike 1 when he entered the league
Strike 2 – Weed as a rookie
Strike 3 – Codeine
Strike 4 – Weed that he is appealing.
no. he said #4 was the suspend stage. Codeine is a drug so that should be #4 not #3?
The biggest confusion I have is what can get a player put into stage one of the program, and what can advance them to stage two of the program? The anecdotes from Mcafee are nice, but like pretty much everything else as it relates to drug testing in the NFL, we only hear one side of the story.
Could him entering the supplemental draft have been contingent on him entering stage one of the program, due to him failing tests in college? Could he have advanced to stage two doing something stupid but not failing a test, like posing in the picture with the bong? I don't know, and I don't even remember the exact timing of everything.
What is pretty clear is that someone must fail two tests in stage two of the program to advance to stage three, and the year banishment only happens due to a failed test in stage three. So I see absolutely no way around him having at least three failed tests since being in the NFL.
There really should be more transparency in the whole process IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,999 Likes: 369
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,999 Likes: 369 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
four incidents before you actually reach a suspension in a drug-related case? hmmm so that means Gordon had 3 other incidents before he got suspended last year? know he failed one pot test in 2012 wonder what the other two incidents were?
the most recent was a cough syrup violation... I think it contained codeine, or something... perhaps an ephedrine clone? Not pot at all.
yea but that was a drug-related case. his first suspension. so he had 3 other drug-related incidents to get that first suspension?
Nobody really knows, due to the confidentiality of all this stuff. You can make some deductions based on the policy itself though.
The most favorable-to-JG explanation is that he entered the league in stage one of the program, due to his college history. He was then advanced to stage two without failing a test. Then he failed a test his rookie year (fine only, kept strictly confidential), failed a test last year (for codeine, punishment reduced due to the clause in the policy about prescription drug abuse), and then this looming failed test that could result in a year+ banishment.
The less-favorable-to-JG explanations are downright ugly, and I haven't seen anything explicitly pointing to it, but you never know.
I think that all of us, including the media types, make a whole lot of guesses as far as what is, and is not contained in the substance abuse file of every player. We think we know ...... but we really have no clue. We get reports ..... but we still don't know. We guess, but even an educated guess is just a guess, especially in this case. We all hear reports, unnamed sources ... leaked reports ....... and so on ...... and sme may be accurate ,...... some less so ...... but in the end, we have to guess at what is, and what s not the case.
It's all up to the lawyers and the arbitrator now. We'll see what happens. I still think that he has a shot at winning this due to the circumstances, and that he can argue the point that if sample B had been tested instead of A, then we wouldn't have a case at all, because he wouldn't have been suspended. If he goes to court, you can be assured that this is exactly what he will argue. We'll see what happens.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,219 Likes: 211
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,219 Likes: 211 |
Quote:
Quote:
JG's argument needs to be that while yes Sample A was positive the confirmatory test on Sample B while technically positive because of a change in cut-off for the confirmatory test was the same specimen and was negative based on the cut-off for a Sample A thus invalidating the test altogether. That is the only argument that he could possibly win and if won would result in no suspension at all. Otherwise, I can't see how he avoids a full year suspension.
I can see that happening then the NFL coming out and giving him a 4 game suspension for DUI.
According to NFL policy, the "B'' test does not have to be above 15 nanograms to confirm the first test -- it just has to contain some of the same banned substance.
I still say if he gets a break it will be from going to rehab. not test results.
Right. That is why I said Sample B was technically positive. They need to argue that the 2 tests need to have the same cutoff point. If you can convince the arbitrator that the national standard is for both tests to have the same cut-off point then you can possibly convince him that the NFL policy regarding B samples should be invalidated.
Don't blame the clown for acting like a clown.
Ask yourself why you keep going to the circus.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,544
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,544 |
Quote:
Could him entering the supplemental draft have been contingent on him entering stage one of the program
yea. some smart guy on the board put up the CBA part where they can.
Quote:
Could he have advanced to stage two doing something stupid but not failing a test,
absoultley. its up to the doc in charge of stage 1.
Quote:
What is pretty clear is that someone must fail two tests in stage two of the program to advance to stage three, and the year banishment only happens due to a failed test in stage three
that's what I think.
being a browns fan is like taking your dog to vet every week to be put down...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906 |
Loved your post to me. Very logical. We don't agree, but I like how you broke things down and explained your point, rather than saying: "you hate Gordon," or "you don't know how to read," or "you care more about being right than...blah, blah, blah." Nicely done, Mantis. I like honest debate. It's how we learn. It's best to examine ALL sides of an argument, evaluate all the points, and then create a NEW idea that is based more in fact and objectivity than opinion and subjectivity. Oh, and man..........I love this paragraph: Quote:
Incorrect. Hypocrisy is "the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform." Given your stance on accountability and moral principle regarding player conduct, it would be hypocritical of YOU to treat Bess and Gordon differently. But most on this board don't hold the same position that you do. They reject your moral principle from the outset, and so they cannot, by definition, be hypocrites. They can be immoral, profoundly immoral if I read you correctly, but they're not hypocrites.
You are actually on to something interesting with all of this, but I think you haven't seen it clearly yet, and I'm probably the only one honest enough to acknowledge it to you. For them, and me, when it comes to football, right and wrong is determined, not by conduct in one's private life, but by one's conduct on the field. This explains why they care about Gordon to a greater degree than Bess. Again, it's not hypocrisy because they are actually sticking faithfully to their moral principle. The real problem, for you, is that their principle is immoral.
Now, you can call us hypocrites for having one moral standard for a football player and another standard for a non-football player, but technically we are not hypocrites for our stance on Gordon in relation to Bess. How's that for hair-splitting? LOL
LOL.........that was excellent stuff. Seriously. You made me think, laugh, and say "dang, I think he just kicked my butt."
Well done.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906 |
Quote:
Goodell and the NFL have been blasted from coast-to-coast by media and fans for the apparent disparity in punishments.
"You have to deal with the facts,'' Goodell told reporters at the Pro Football Hall of Fame press conference Friday in Canton. "We have a drug program that is collectively bargained and it has a step process. It takes four incidents before you actually reach a suspension in a drug-related case. You have to respond to facts here. [/quote
Gee, where I have heard this before?
Quote:
He said Rice's suspension was based in part on the fact he's been accountable for his actions.
"He recognizes he made a horrible mistake, that it is unacceptable, by his standards and by our standards. And he's got to work to re-establish himself. The criminal justice system, as you know, put him in a diversionary program with no discipline, and we felt it was appropriate to have discipline, and to continue counseling programs and to continue our education work.
"And I was also very impressed with Ray in the sense that Ray not only is accepting this issue, and saying how it was wrong, but he's saying 'I want to make a powerful difference in this area.' I think you heard from him yesterday. He is a young man that really understands the mistake he made and he is out and about and determined to make a positive difference.''
Accountable for his actions? Hmmmm........heard that somewhere before, as well. On the other hand, we got a guy who says it is cough syrup and second-hand smoke. Yeah, okay. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 9,145
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 9,145 |
Quote:
Quote:
-JC-
Mary Kay Cabot
‏@MaryKayCabot
Arbitrator Harold Henderson will make the decision on #browns josh Gordon's appeal (not expected today) and it will be final.
Twitter Link
I think that the fact that there is an arbitrator involved is good news for Josh (in terms of avoiding a suspension). It allows the league to save face as they won't be the ones handing out the leniency, so they won't have to answer any questions on it. It would also give them a platform to stand on to come out and say that they need to review their program, etc...
I think that there will be a happy middle ground found here that let's Josh play ball, let's the league not be the "bad" guy (especially on the heels of the heat they are taking right now on Ray Rice), and let's the league and the NFLPA have an opening to discuss a dramatic change to their policies on testing.
My fear is that Goodell not being involved also gives him the ability to save face should Gordon be suspended for a year by someone else.
WE DON'T NEED A QB BEFORE WE GET A LINE THAT CAN PROTECT HIM
my two cents...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501 |
Gordon's appeal lasted all day today (8/1/14) going from 9:30 AM to 7 PM. It will continue Monday (8/4/14). Link I don't see any way Gordon gets out of this, but having the appeal last the entire season is an interesting idea.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204
~ Legend
|
|
~ Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204 |
It'll be like Mr. Smith Goes To Washington 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Not to mention, Goodell has less excuse to hide from it now, other than having missed a whole days worth of hearings.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 4,990 Likes: 9
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 4,990 Likes: 9 |
Quote:
... Accountable for his actions? Hmmmm........heard that somewhere before, as well. On the other hand, we got a guy who says it is cough syrup and second-hand smoke. Yeah, okay.
I believe that's what Josh said. I believe him. Can you prove he is lying?
First time I had cough syrup prescribed with codeine in it I had no idea what it was. I've seen it prescribed for bad colds tons of times now since. Why shouldn't I believe him when it happened to me.
We have gone back on forth on the second hand smoke. We all agree he was stupid to be around it. I don't think he would have been around it if he knew it would give a positive on his tests because he is being rigorously tested. Young kids are amazing in what they don't know. I can believe him.
You can choose to be cynical towards him but that don't mean the rest of us have to. I hope he gets off. Not because he is a Browns player but because he is a young man that while still living a bit reckless as young ones tend to do its obvious to me that he is trying to be a better man. So yeah, I am going to give him the benefit of the doubt THIS time.
You can't fix stupid but you can destroy ignorance. When you destroy ignorance you remove the justifications for evil. If you want to destroy evil then educate our people. Hate is a tool of the stupid to deal with what they can't understand.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,436 Likes: 448
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,436 Likes: 448 |
j/c While we all want Gordon to play this year, it looks doubtful, right? Science. Drug testing. It is supposed to be accurate, right? I pee in a bottle, they take the bottle, and divided it into 2 vials, and they can't even replicate the results from the same urine??? And that's science? Forget the fact that the nfl's tolerance level is so far below the WADA (olympics) or other major league sports. Hey, this is just football. But "science" can't explain the deviation in one person's pee................yet scientists want us to believe in man made global warming based on their "tests". Oh, but then we get "climate change". Science told us, in the mid 1970's, that a new ice age was imminent. 39 years later, science tells us it's not an imminent ice age, it's man made global warming........er, climate change. Science............hey, anyone see the reports about the fbi and forensic crime lab reports being bad? Check this out: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crim...dc97_story.htmlNow, can someone explain to me how the results of a simple urine test can't be replicated..............but we're supposed to believe science on global warming? If the FBI can't do simple tests...............yet sends people to prison based on false testing...............can someone explain how we can believe science? Science is 1+1 =2. Hard, proven fact. Science is not "well, we tested the pee, and we got different results, but we're going with the first result, cause that's the one we wanted" Science is not "we've studied millions of years of evidence, and we know an ice age is imminent,", only to turn around and say the opposite only 40 years later. If it takes millions of years to study.......how can science say the last 40 years have changed it? Josh will probably get hung out to dry. Based on the science that one ., in 2 bottles, couldn't be replicated, but the first one had him guilty. Check out the link I provided. Not even the FBI can verify their findings.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
But "science" can't explain the deviation in one person's pee................yet scientists want us to believe in man made global warming based on their "tests". Oh, but then we get "climate change".
This is pretty awesome.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,761 Likes: 937
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,761 Likes: 937 |
j/c
What impresses me the most about the reports we've heard in the last few days:
70 (!) consecutive passed tests.
I don't care how careful a person tries to be, or how 'foolproof' his "masking techniques" are, it's almost impossible to pass 70 tests while still using- even casually and occasionally.
The circumstantial evidence suggests that he's made a good-faith effort to keep the THC out of his body. I'd also go so far as to say that the preponderance of negative tests is more than enough to place doubt on the efficacy of the 71st test. Were I his lawyer/rep, that would be my line of attack, rather than 'secondhand contact' approach.
On the subject of secondhand and DUI: Get a driver when you're going out to the clubs. Drive your fierce camo Porsche only when you're stone-cold sober. Put distance between you and your torching pals when the fatty is fired up. Better yet, put TRUE distance between anyone who doesn't understand the stakes you face- a true friend wouldn't endanger your career by selfishly firing up near you.
As a fan of the team, I've already resigned myself to the very real possibility of a Gordon-free 2014 campaign. If that's the decision that's handed down, I'll be fine with it. I'm a fan of the team over any single player... and I'll be just as entertained and intrigued by how the Browns compensate for the lack of his production the same way I would if a clean, drug-free, never-been-in-the-program Josh Gordon tore an ACL in training camp.
I don't think he'll get off without incurring some penalty. What that penalty is? Anybody's guess at this point. It's a shame that he's even in this position, but his past has led him to this point, and I won't let him off the hook for that. Choices have consequences.
Will I miss seeing that long, loping stride separating him from panting defenders after the catch? You bet I will. Will I wonder if his presence could have made a difference in a 21-17 loss? Of course. I am human, after all.
Truth be told, I'll have no trouble living with whatever comes down. There will still be Browns football to be played. Next man up.
______________________________
I was a mess at age 22. Got myself into a whole lot of trouble. To this day, I still believe that My Father's fatal heart attack (at the age of 53) was due in part to the extra stress my foolishness placed on the family. When my antics had reached 'critical mass,' and the world slapped me down, one of our last man-to-man conversations ended with him telling me this:
"If you don't want this to become the rest of your life, it's time to 'clean house' son. It's time to figure out who your real friends are. Dump the rest. After a month, you won't miss them, and they won't even remember you."
Best advice I ever took. I hope Josh Gordon has someone like that in his corner. If so, he's got a fighting chance at a good life- with or without football.
.02
"too many notes, not enough music-"
#GMStong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,999 Likes: 369
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,999 Likes: 369 |
10 hours and they still haven't arrived at a conclusion seems to me to indicate to me that there is, at least, a strong possibility that his case is a persuasive one.
There must be a line of attack that has some chance, or the arbitrator would have shut it down by now. I mean .... 10 hours, and the case isn't fully presented?
I am encouraged at the prospect of Gordon winning his appeal. Maybe I'm wrong ...... but I think that odds got better because if there wasn't a strong case, there s no way it would continue for that long.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18,865 Likes: 962
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18,865 Likes: 962 |
Looks like the hearing is extended until Monday. I hope your feelings prove true. http://www.ohio.com/sports/browns/browns...monday-1.509730
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,436 Likes: 448
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,436 Likes: 448 |
Quote:
Quote:
But "science" can't explain the deviation in one person's pee................yet scientists want us to believe in man made global warming based on their "tests". Oh, but then we get "climate change".
This is pretty awesome.
Could you clarify that? As in: what is pretty awesome?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Well one Josh Gordon thread turned into a weed thread, a thread in Everything Else about weed turned into a Josh Gordon thread, and.... I'm trying to figure out what's going on in this one. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,219 Likes: 211
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,219 Likes: 211 |
Quote:
Science is 1+1 =2.
Actually, that's math 
Don't blame the clown for acting like a clown.
Ask yourself why you keep going to the circus.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,999 Likes: 369
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,999 Likes: 369 |
Quote:
Looks like the hearing is extended until Monday. I hope your feelings prove true.
http://www.ohio.com/sports/browns/browns...monday-1.509730
I read something about how the test B is used to validate test A, and that as long as the 2nd test shows any level of the banned substance, then the player is guilty. However, I have also read that there have been no previous cases where a player had the 2nd test show a level not in violation. In other words, in every other case, the 2nd sample has been consistent in showing a violation in every other case. That is not the case with Gordon. Thus, the entire test process has been thrown into doubt. This is how Sherman won his appeal. The tactic is a sound one, and I think that it stands a solid chance of winning. The lawyer could even argue that the 2 tests, if recombined, would test at a level not in violation of the policy. The other test is another problem for Gordon's legal team, and to be honest I don't have any idea how they approach that one. They must have a strategy though.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,093
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,093 |
Thanks. Believe it or not, after I wrote that post I started to view my position on Gordon with some uneasiness. I don't like the fact that I hold a football player to a different standard of conduct than I do a non-football player. I'm still not sure if there are any undesirable real-world consequences to my position, as I think you are suggesting there are, but at least, now, I am slightly uncomfortable. One thing I can say for sure, this Gordon situation has exposed more than merely the player involved.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,299 Likes: 171
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,299 Likes: 171 |
Most cannot comprehend what a nanogram is..
1 nanogram is 1 trillionith of a gram per liter
so 15 grams (or cc's) in a trillion liters....
well that would be the same as a gram in 17.61 billion gallons of water.
or a gram in 1,761 millions gallons of water.
at this level, background contamination may be a consideration.
There will be no playoffs. Can’t play with who we have out there and compounding it with garbage playcalling and worse execution. We don’t have good skill players on offense period. Browns 20 - Bears 17.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 13,723 Likes: 174
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 13,723 Likes: 174 |
From the article: http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2014/08/josh_gordons_appeal_hearing_la.htmlOne way Goodell would become involved is if Gordon loses his appeal and is eligible to apply for reinstatement with the commissioner after a year. During that time, Gordon would be banned from the team and have to stay clean. You can't play and you cannot smoke weed.... Boy-oh-boy-oh-boy!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 110 Likes: 5
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 110 Likes: 5 |
Quote:
I pee in a bottle, they take the bottle, and divided it into 2 vials, and they can't even replicate the results from the same urine??? And that's science?
Forget the fact that the nfl's tolerance level is so far below the WADA (olympics) or other major league sports.
Hey, this is just football.
But "science" can't explain the deviation in one person's pee................yet scientists want us to believe in man made global warming based on their "tests". Oh, but then we get "climate change".
Science told us, in the mid 1970's, that a new ice age was imminent. 39 years later, science tells us it's not an imminent ice age, it's man made global warming........er, climate change.
Science............hey, anyone see the reports about the fbi and forensic crime lab reports being bad? Check this out: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crim...dc97_story.html
Now, can someone explain to me how the results of a simple urine test can't be replicated..............but we're supposed to believe science on global warming? If the FBI can't do simple tests...............yet sends people to prison based on false testing...............can someone explain how we can believe science?
Science is 1+1 =2. Hard, proven fact. Science is not "well, we tested the pee, and we got different results, but we're going with the first result, cause that's the one we wanted"
Many posters keep making the same erroneous argument about the fairness of the 2 tests. Posters are missing the point - there is one specimen, split into Cup A and Cup B. There are two tests, 1 for >15 and the other to confirm some amount of T. If Test 1 is conducted on both Cups A & B, the results would be the same, i.e. >15.
Similarly, Test 2 on both Cups would confirm the presence of T.
The 2 tests are for separate reasons, the choice of Cups used for each test is irrelevant.
Gordon's not going to be able to argue anything about being below the T threshhold based on which Cup was used.
Good luck hoping this specious argument will have weight.
I believe anything's possible but there will NEVER BE a justification for leniency based of the 2 Test results. JMHO
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 Likes: 234
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 Likes: 234 |
9-1/2 hours and still not done? Even with a dinner break, that sounds more like a negotiation than a hearing. I wonder if Gordon's legal team is threatening litigation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 Likes: 136
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 Likes: 136 |
chet...I really don't think they ever had such a borderline test before. That is why this is an issue and the results are great in effect to the player. If it was a cause n effect of a player going from stage one to stage two...I don't think this would be an issue at all.
We all well can't say all know the rule of the test. The other premise in this is if they picked the other vile to be tested first....done over Gordon passed his test. That is why the levels are controversial. I think when players test positive they are more to that 150 number that the Olympics use? or if its true as Pblack says they would be dead at 150...and the numbers are tighter...then I say that 19 he spoke about.
Length of time...could be lawyers being lawyers??? Its not like the case has been presented and the arbitrator is taking this long to deliberate and check the facts. If the defense side presented their case in an hour or two and its taking this long to make a decision that could be good for Gordon.
I don't think the commish gets off from the Rice ordeal by stating what he did. I'll say this, knowing the media if Gordon gets banned...the Rice ordeal will rise its ugly head. If Gordon gets off I think it will die out. But the NFL actually doesn't think there is a controversy over the Rice thing...after all they justified it to the press...there ya have it. In those areas sometimes power does blind them in their perception.
jmho - as they said there is no gray area in all of this...he either gets off or he gets banned indefinitely.
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,212
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,212 |
No Chet- its the same test performed on Sample A and Sample B. They were just performed at different times. (probably when Gordon challenged the results) But it should be reproducible- same values within the standard deviation. And there is no way the stadard deviation is 15%. And there lies the entire case for Gordon. Now if the NFL says the second test B only needs to contain trace amounts - and does not need to be over the threshold, he's hosed. But that really is a ridiculous argument on the NFL's part. On a technicality, much like Sherman's cup leaking, Gordon should escape punishment.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
9-1/2 hours and still not done? Even with a dinner break, that sounds more like a negotiation than a hearing. I wonder if Gordon's legal team is threatening litigation.
Its being treated as trial and Gordon and his lawyer are bringing in lots of witnesses.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,999 Likes: 369
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,999 Likes: 369 |
I bet that they have brought in a ton of expert witnesses.
The pattern for winning this kind of case, if there is one, is to discredit the system. There seem to be enough problems here to do so.
If they bring in, for example, 15 experts from the field, who say that there should never be more than a .002 (just a number, for example purposes only) difference between 2 tests of the same sample, and Gordon's test had a discrepancy of over 2.0 ....... then they could demonstrate that neither result is valid, and both should be thrown out. If they manage to do that, then any tests done as a result of that positive test could also be thrown out, because without that 1st positive, they would not have moved on to another and different test.
It's a technicality, but that is how Sherman won .... on a technicality.
I like Gordon's chances right now. However, as I said earlier, I hope that the Browns and his agent(s) continue to work on getting him counselling, mentoring, and help in better picking his friends.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,219 Likes: 211
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,219 Likes: 211 |
Quote:
They were just performed at different times. (probably when Gordon challenged the results)
In drug testing, whenever an A sample is positive then the B sample automatically gets tested. Regardless of whether the results are challenged. Actually, even before A results are reported.
Don't blame the clown for acting like a clown.
Ask yourself why you keep going to the circus.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,613 Likes: 1044
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,613 Likes: 1044 |
Money.
Josh Gordon stands to lose about a million dollars if suspended for a year.
A million dollars for a disputed drug test. Not possession of a controlled substance while driving under the influence like Mr. Jim Irsay.
Donte Stallworth got a year suspension for killing a man while driving drunk.
Of course we all know about Ray Rice getting a two game suspension for sucker punching his wife. Rice was charged in March with felony assault, but those charges were dropped "in favor of counseling".
If a professional boxer hits someone outside the ring. The charge would be assault with a deadly weapon. A felony. In the Rice case we are talking about an assault on a defenseless woman.
I do not care how contrite Ray Rice is. A professional football player punching a women in the face could have resulted in very a serious injury.
See link to Kermit Washington's punching Rudy Tomjanovich:
http://www.youtube.com/v/jgqUZ1IAA_8
The whole history of Josh Gordon by comparison is minor.
Let's be real here. What percentage of young male adults age 18 to 25 have not gotten drunk or tried marijuana?
I am not passing judgement here. I am not saying what is right or wrong.
But in light of all that is going on regarding the question of legalization of marijuana, drug testing standards in sports, and the NFL's personal conduct policy. It appears that any type of consistency in policy has been thrown out the window.
Roger Goodell's recent comment's defending the Ray Rice suspension was clearly a case of grasping for straws. The court of public opinion has made that crystal clear.
NFLPA and the NFL have bargained for a drug policy. It is in place. Gordon by definition has violated the exiting policy. The Gordon case is in front of a arbitrator. Not a judge or jury. His decision will be final.
A Missouri Court of Appeals judge has declared the NFL's arbitration policy "unconscionable and unenforceable," writing that "the Arbitration Provision does not afford a mechanism to ensure the fairness and impartiality of the arbitration proceeding." It's important reading for any football player who's ever wondered why his suspension appeal is heard by someone appointed by Roger Goodell.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,212
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,212 |
Quote:
Quote:
They were just performed at different times. (probably when Gordon challenged the results)
In drug testing, whenever an A sample is positive then the B sample automatically gets tested. Regardless of whether the results are challenged. Actually, even before A results are reported.
my understanding was the immunoassay was positive, so they then moved on to sample A to verify. But if they ran sample A and sample B at the same time, all the better for Gordon, -how could two tests on same sample be that far off, especially if they were ran minutes apart.......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,219 Likes: 211
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,219 Likes: 211 |
They do not run them simultaneously.
If the A is + then the B is done automatically.
Might be a couple days later or week later.
Don't blame the clown for acting like a clown.
Ask yourself why you keep going to the circus.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,299 Likes: 171
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,299 Likes: 171 |
The problem is not the science, from a testing level the results are comparable.
The quandary, is that one is higher than the limit and the other lower than the limit established by the NFL. It opens up all sorts of questions and strategies for a defense.
If the values were 160 and 140 ng/L we would not be having the discussion.
There will be no playoffs. Can’t play with who we have out there and compounding it with garbage playcalling and worse execution. We don’t have good skill players on offense period. Browns 20 - Bears 17.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906 |
Are you guys still whining about this?  Poor, poor Josh. He never had a chance because the NFL is soooo unfair. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 26,836 Likes: 482
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 26,836 Likes: 482 |
YO bro lets say you had to pee into a cup at work to keep YOUR job,You pee into ONE cup and your employer tells you that you flunked the test, and you demand a second test from your same pee sample and you pass the second test. I know damn well you would be throwing a fit about it, as would I. So why is this so different bud?
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Josh Gordon continued
|
|
