- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Josh gordon suspended for the year
Posted on 8/27/14 at 12:44 pm to GynoSandberg
Posted on 8/27/14 at 12:44 pm to GynoSandberg
Not at all.
He's not challenging the NFL's right to reprimand him for a failed test. He would be arguing that he did not fail a test or that the failed test was invalid.
He's not challenging the NFL's right to reprimand him for a failed test. He would be arguing that he did not fail a test or that the failed test was invalid.
This post was edited on 8/27/14 at 12:46 pm
1
Posted on 8/27/14 at 12:45 pm to drizztiger
quote:
mooooooooooooooot pooooooiiiiiiinnnnnnttttttt
failing a drug test for a 3rd or 4th time is not a moot point. Even if it was 2nd hand smoke. You're an idiot for even being around it
Posted on 8/27/14 at 12:45 pm to GynoSandberg
quote:Of course not. This isn't a criminal case.
Would the fact that he was a 3rd time offender in the NFL (codeine and weed), failed 3 test for herb in college, has a recent DWI under his belt change anything? Does the college stuff and DWI come into play any?
It comes down to NFL rules versus Ohio state law.
I personally think Ohio state law wins, therefore Gordon will win.
Posted on 8/27/14 at 12:46 pm to NOFOX
So it's about the laws of the state of Ohio, not the NFL substance abuse policy?
Posted on 8/27/14 at 12:48 pm to GynoSandberg
quote:The NFL drug testing policy violates Ohio state law in Gordon's unique case.
So it's about the laws of the state of Ohio, not the NFL substance abuse policy?
Posted on 8/27/14 at 12:50 pm to drizztiger
In other words, if both samples came back at 15ng or higher, then Gordon wouldn't have much of a case. But, they didn't. One came back above, the other below. NFL says positive for weed. Ohio state law says that's a negative test.
This post was edited on 8/27/14 at 12:51 pm
Posted on 8/27/14 at 12:54 pm to drizztiger
Are you a lawyer or just going off this Cedric Hopkins blog?
Posted on 8/27/14 at 12:56 pm to boom roasted
quote:
Based on what, though?
possible damages to Gordon are a lot. The disparity in punishment between a non-violent, victimless crime and someone getting KO'd by a grown man. The absurdity of it all. Its unconscionable.
This post was edited on 8/27/14 at 12:57 pm
Posted on 8/27/14 at 12:56 pm to GynoSandberg
If he gets off they will suspend him for the year for something else. The NFL doesn't like to be fricked with.
Posted on 8/27/14 at 12:57 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
repppppeaaaaattttt offfffffenddddddderrrrrrrrrrrrr
Matt Prater was in stage 3 for alcohol...got 4 games
what's your point?
Posted on 8/27/14 at 12:58 pm to GynoSandberg
quote:
Would the fact that he was a 3rd time offender in the NFL (codeine and weed), failed 3 test for herb in college, has a recent DWI under his belt change anything? Does the college stuff and DWI come into play any?
Of course. But I understand he was under a threshold that meant he probably didn't smoke at all anyway. The repeat offender thing would definitely come into play in the overall scheme of things.
Posted on 8/27/14 at 12:58 pm to GynoSandberg
quote:
Are you a lawyer or just going off this Cedric Hopkins blog
Posted on 8/27/14 at 12:59 pm to rmc
quote:They sure are.
possible damages to Gordon are a lot.
quote:Ray Rice's punishment has zero relevance to this case. You can't say "well he only got _____ punishment and I got _____." Everything is in the CBA.
The disparity in punishment between a non-violent, victimless crime and someone getting KO'd by a grown man.
Posted on 8/27/14 at 1:00 pm to GynoSandberg
I'm going off those articles and other legal columns I've read.
Posted on 8/27/14 at 1:00 pm to rmc
I own this dude on 4 teams (well, 3 now that I already dropped him in one)
In your legal opinion big rick, should I hold this dude for awhile or not? How soon would they file an injunction?
In your legal opinion big rick, should I hold this dude for awhile or not? How soon would they file an injunction?
Posted on 8/27/14 at 1:01 pm to boom roasted
quote:
Ray Rice's punishment has zero relevance to this case. You can't say "well he only got _____ punishment and I got _____." Everything is in the CBA.
It doesn't, but you can surely bring it up. I'm just saying I think the guy can get an injunction. I'm not saying he is going to win his case. If we go by the CBA then he is toast. But the CBA is currently leading to an absurd consequence that the NFLPA/NFL needs to change or litigation like this could rise up from time to time.
Posted on 8/27/14 at 1:02 pm to rmc
Does federal or state law come into play in regards to the CBA?
Posted on 8/27/14 at 1:02 pm to GynoSandberg
quote:
In your legal opinion big rick, should I hold this dude for awhile or not? How soon would they file an injunction?
I own him in 3 of my 3 leagues. I am holding onto him because I think it is worth it to see if he files something in the next 2 weeks. After that I am going to consider letting him go in the two re-draft leagues, but not the keeper.
Posted on 8/27/14 at 1:04 pm to GynoSandberg
quote:
Does federal or state law come into play in regards to the CBA?
That is getting beyond my expertise there. I would think the CBA is probably controlled by federal labor law at the end of the day, but state courts may be able to provide some relief under state law and/or federal law.
Posted on 8/27/14 at 1:09 pm to jimithing11
quote:
Matt Prater was in stage 3 for alcohol...got 4 games
what's your point?
Reply • Options • Back to Top
What's your point?
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News