Heads up on Browns/ Steelers. Must read

[The Capping Genius]

Today in Cleveland @6am on CBS 19 they reported that Gordon is planning on suing the NFL. Why is this important? Because according the the report, if he files a law suit, he will be able to play in the opener in Pittsburgh and getting 7 points before it happens may be worth a wager. He is the best part of the offense. He will also be able to play the whole season as well. If he loses the suit when it goes to trail, he may have much harder time to get reinstated next year. If he wins, he gets to play out his full career, whatever that maybe. FWIW
Browns backers here's your chance. You may not want to wait to see it happen. I'm sure the line will move against Cleveland if Gordon files today.

 

[tipyerbartender1]

Josh taking this sucker to the Supreme Court! Potheads unite.

 

[tipyerbartender1]

I don't know how many points he's worth, but he's nice to have around. I don't think the chance of Gordon playing this week is nonexistent. Minimal, but not nonexistent. Guy has a bit of a case.

 

[Tito]

Did you hear anything more on this tip? Is he def suing?

 

[Tito]

Ok nevermind, looks like they will make the decision to sue or not in the next day or two

 

[JumpOnBoard]

I think the Williams guy from Minny did something similar...

 

[Tito]

Not sure why he wouldn't...unless he doesn't want to play and is happy w staying home and puffing away

 

[twinkie13]

I think the Williams guy from Minny did something similar...

I think all the Star Caps dudes did

then winded up sitting anyway

 

[Lareux]

Not sure why he wouldn't...unless he doesn't want to play and is happy w staying home and puffing away

One reason that's been mentioned is that the NFL may fuck with him and not reinstate him when he's eligible for reinstatement if he decides to sue the league. That would be pretty petty by the NFL, even retaliatory, and really shouldn't come into play if he does everything that's asked of him while he's suspended....but you never know with the NFL anymore.

 

[The Capping Genius]

One reason that's been mentioned is that the NFL may fuck with him and not reinstate him when he's eligible for reinstatement if he decides to sue the league. That would be pretty petty by the NFL, even retaliatory, and really shouldn't come into play if he does everything that's asked of him while he's suspended....but you never know with the NFL anymore.

They have too much power to completely shut out a player because of choice, instead of evidence. From sources Ive read he had two different test results. One that was on the line of failure and one that was way off and actually below the testing line.

Other reports were that the owners of the Browns were extremly pissed off because the NFL wasted 4 months to post a ruling and therefore gave them little to no time to find or trade for another WR. It also changed what they would have done in the draft.

 

[Lareux]

They have too much power to completely shut out a player because of choice, instead of evidence. From sources Ive read he had two different test results. One that was on the line of failure and one that was way off and actually below the testing line.

Other reports were that the owners of the Browns were extremly pissed off because the NFL wasted 4 months to post a ruling and therefore gave them little to no time to find or trade for another WR. It also changed what they would have done in the draft.

Right, I don't disagree with any of this. I was simply responding to a question as to why Gordon may choose to not go through with the lawsuit.

As far as the Browns and what they would have done in the draft, I don't buy that at all as the reason they didn't select a WR in a draft that was deep at WR. The Browns knew they would be losing Gordon for quite a while, if not the entire season, whether the NFL made and announced a decision or not. I understand it took 4 months, and that's complete BS, but the fact that a decision wasn't announced shouldn't have had an effect on what they did in the draft...unless they were somehow holding out hope that he wouldn't be suspended at all, or if he was suspended, that it would only be a couple of games....which is completely naive and I just can't see the front office not expecting a long suspension all along.

 

[The Capping Genius]

Right, I don't disagree with any of this. I was simply responding to a question as to why Gordon may choose to not go through with the lawsuit.

As far as the Browns and what they would have done in the draft, I don't buy that at all as the reason they didn't select a WR in a draft that was deep at WR. The Browns knew they would be losing Gordon for quite a while, if not the entire season, whether the NFL made and announced a decision or not. I understand it took 4 months, and that's complete BS, but the fact that a decision wasn't announced shouldn't have had an effect on what they did in the draft...unless they were somehow holding out hope that he wouldn't be suspended at all, or if he was suspended, that it would only be a couple of games....which is completely naive and I just can't see the front office not expecting a long suspension all along.

Reports said that they were expecting a short suspension, if any, - because the lawyers claimed they had enough evidence that he was tested with too much inconsistency, and that the tests were unreliable with such a wide range of results. So, that may have given the Browns too much confidence that Gordons case could even be thrown out.

I thnk a law suit will prevail because he was to be paid large money this season and that sum alone, could allow him to survive for many years if he was able to play this season... (Shrug)

 

[Lareux]

Reports said that they were expecting a short suspension, if any, - because the lawyers claimed they had enough evidence that he was tested with too much inconsistency, and that the tests were unreliable with such a wide range of results. So, that may have given the Browns too much confidence that Gordons case could even be thrown out.

I thnk a law suit will prevail because he was to be paid large money this season and that sum alone, could allow him to survive for many years if he was able to play this season... (Shrug)

Yeah, then I guess the Browns' front office isn't that bright or 'tuned in' to the NFL. Almost everyone was saying he was facing a year long suspension, regardless of the feelings of a poor testing process by the Browns.

I have no idea if a lawsuit will prevail, but if it did, it wouldn't be because he was going to make a certain amount of money and that may negatively impact his life. The NFL and NFLPA signed a CBA outlining what will happen if you fail a drug test. Doesn't matter if anyone thinks the suspensions handed out are fair or not (that's a separate issue), the NFL did what was in their power. Having said that, if it is decided that the samples collected from Gordon were drastically different, and it calls into question the tests from Gordon themselves, he may very well win a lawsuit.

Now the NFL and NFLPA are reportedly talking about raising the maximum threshold they have for marijuana in a urine sample....that's crazy to me. Either you allow them to smoke, or you don't....you shouldn't be allowed to say 'well, this much is okay in a sample, but going over that threshold will get you suspended.' Just own up to the fact that you're okay with your players smoking pot and stop the charade....which is where it looks like we're headed. It's not a performance enhancer, and may have benefits to those who suffer head injuries...just let them smoke if they want to.

 

[The Capping Genius]

Yeah, then I guess the Browns' front office isn't that bright or 'tuned in' to the NFL. Almost everyone was saying he was facing a year long suspension, regardless of the feelings of a poor testing process by the Browns.

I have no idea if a lawsuit will prevail, but if it did, it wouldn't be because he was going to make a certain amount of money and that may negatively impact his life. The NFL and NFLPA signed a CBA outlining what will happen if you fail a drug test. Doesn't matter if anyone thinks the suspensions handed out are fair or not (that's a separate issue), the NFL did what was in their power. Having said that, if it is decided that the samples collected from Gordon were drastically different, and it calls into question the tests from Gordon themselves, he may very well win a lawsuit.

Now the NFL and NFLPA are reportedly talking about raising the maximum threshold they have for marijuana in a urine sample....that's crazy to me. Either you allow them to smoke, or you don't....you shouldn't be allowed to say 'well, this much is okay in a sample, but going over that threshold will get you suspended.' Just own up to the fact that you're okay with your players smoking pot and stop the charade....which is where it looks like we're headed. It's not a performance enhancer, and may have benefits to those who suffer head injuries...just let them smoke if they want to.

You point out an interesting fact in the maijuana rules potentially be changed. Everyone in Colroado is allowed to get high. I wonder what they are going to do about Bronco platers who are in places with users and getting volumes of second had smoke/ LOL

 

[Lareux]

You point out an interesting fact in the maijuana rules potentially be changed. Everyone in Colroado is allowed to get high. I wonder what they are going to do about Bronco platers who are in places with users and getting volumes of second had smoke/ LOL

True, but the maximum threshold the NFL testing policy uses is most likely already well above 'contact high smoke' as it is. It will be interesting if/when they discuss this in the off-season though, that's for sure.

 

[RetroVK]

Imagine sitting in a jury or sitting there as a judge and thinking .... "all this guy has to do is not be an absolute idiot and he makes millions playing a game .... and he goes and gets high anyway".

an if he was a coke addict or a heroin addict I would understand but you guys all tell me pot is not addicting ..... meaning this cat is a stone cold moron.

 

[mogo]

the reason this is such a big deal is the NFL's has a stupid drug policy with the lowest testing limits on marijuana anywhere...

http://www.mensjournal.com/health-f...l-josh-gordons-ban-upheld-by-goodell-20140827

Gordon's A-Sample was slightly above the league's THC threshold of 15 ng/mL – while still within the false-positive window – and his B-Sample was slightly below it. Swap the labels, test the B-Sample first, and Josh Gordon doesn't miss a single snap.

Worse for Gordon, the NFL is considering increasing the THC threshold, which is currently well below the standard of most U.S. institutions (50 ng/mL), and 10-fold lower than the threshold for the World Anti-Doping Agency, which governs the Olympics (150 ng/mL). WADA increased its line from 15 ng/mL last May "as a matter of fairness, and to provide consistency." Doctors also often have trouble determining the timing of past drug use due to "individual differences in drug metabolism and excretions," with one study participant showing a concentration above 20 ng/mL 67 days after their last drug exposure.

 

[KJ]

It's really bullshit that marijuana folks think that drug should be treated differently than the other social drugs

 

[mogo]

It's really bullshit that marijuana folks think that drug should be treated differently than the other social drugs

well it should be... it can't be properly tested as noted above

 

[KJ]

Is that because you like weed?

I know plenty of losers that smoke weed and plenty of highly educated folks that partake in amphetamines

I don't err on the side of the tree

 

[mogo]

no it's b/c i can use common sense and experience and not lies and propaganda that people who don't know what they are talking about still believe in and push as facts....

 

[KJ]

that's not to call you out Mogo, just seems bullshit, I don't think weed is so different than anything else

Think you should socially be able to do what you want, regardless of the drug. Alcohol's the worst, work backwards from there

 

[The Capping Genius]

that's not to call you out Mogo, just seems bullshit, I don't think weed is so different than anything else

Think you should socially be able to do what you want, regardless of the drug. Alcohol's the worst, work backwards from there

Maybe thats because alcohol is the cheapest? Other drugs are more inclined for users to be violent imo.
No one should be able to do what they wnt. Just ask the families of those who died from drugs and alcohol. Also, tell the jury that next time you are selected to do jury duty.