- 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: NBC just said Josh Gordon could come back
Posted on 9/12/14 at 10:42 am to PortCityTiger24
Posted on 9/12/14 at 10:42 am to PortCityTiger24
yeah exactly. get the frick out.
don't try to start shite with the Gordonistorian if you can't back it up
don't try to start shite with the Gordonistorian if you can't back it up
3
Posted on 9/12/14 at 10:44 am to jimithing11
Posted on 9/12/14 at 10:45 am to jimithing11
Before this thing is over, we should all be Gordonistorians. 
You should teach a class.
You should teach a class. 
Posted on 9/12/14 at 10:45 am to jimithing11
quote:
Yes it does. If the owners want HGH, they have to give something too
Uh, they are giving up something.
You're assuming the NFL is willing to meet them on that. Also, as a union, you can't just think about 1 individual.
This post was edited on 9/12/14 at 10:48 am
Posted on 9/12/14 at 10:47 am to jimithing11
quote:
jimithing11
Posted on 9/12/14 at 10:48 am to TigerBait1127
Posted on 9/12/14 at 10:49 am to jimithing11
So the NFLPA should throw the whole agreement out if the NFL doesn't decide to let the players in 2013 back?
Posted on 9/12/14 at 10:50 am to jimithing11
quote:No need to be a dick. You're reverting back to the old jimithing.
jimithing11
This post was edited on 9/12/14 at 10:51 am
Posted on 9/12/14 at 10:52 am to abellsujr
quote:
quote: The standard for a positive marijuana test would be raised significantly from the current 15 ng/ml of THC, though not all the way up to the current Olympic standard of 150 ng/ml, making it harder to test positive. According to Gordon's account, his most recent positive test would not have been a positive test at all under the new policy.
What's your point? He got his suspension reduced bc of this.
He's getting 8 games bc he failed his rest last season and was handed down the suspension this season
Posted on 9/12/14 at 10:53 am to TigerBait1127
quote:
So the NFLPA should throw the whole agreement out if the NFL doesn't decide to let the players in 2013 back?
He was suspended in 2014
Posted on 9/12/14 at 10:53 am to PortCityTiger24
I said Blackmon bc I thought he was arguing all players with failed drug tests would be allowed back under his "black and white" theory. Not because of by how much he failed a test by
Posted on 9/12/14 at 10:57 am to jimithing11
quote:
He was suspended in 2014
And? It took place in the 2013 league year.
I don't even disagree with you here. I don't think he should be suspended.
But his offense took place in the 2013 league year. That isn't up for debate
This post was edited on 9/12/14 at 11:01 am
Posted on 9/12/14 at 10:59 am to GynoSandberg
quote:My point is he would've never been suspended under the new agreement. That's what I'm saying.
What's your point? He got his suspension reduced bc of this.
He's getting 8 games bc he failed his rest last season and was handed down the suspension this season
quote:LINK
But the source said a condition of the new policy would be that certain players currently serving drug suspensions under the old policy would have their suspensions altered to reflect the new policy.
How is an 8 game suspension reflecting the new policy?
Posted on 9/12/14 at 11:00 am to abellsujr
His suspension was altered to reflect the new policy.
Posted on 9/12/14 at 11:01 am to GynoSandberg
quote:How?
His suspension was altered to reflect the new policy.
Posted on 9/12/14 at 11:04 am to abellsujr
Posted on 9/12/14 at 11:04 am to TigerBait1127
quote:
But his offense took place in the 2013 league year. That isn't up for debate
so what?
He didn't receive a punishment until 2014. Under the new policy, his punishment would be nothing.....there is no punishment for 16.0 ng/ml on a drug test (under this new proposed deal that is pending agreement)
Posted on 9/12/14 at 11:05 am to mylsuhat
quote:I don't think so. Still all speculation.
So it's official now?
Posted on 9/12/14 at 11:05 am to mylsuhat
It's not official, but it looks like 8 total games.
Posted on 9/12/14 at 11:05 am to mylsuhat
That chick is about as unreliable as it gets.
Wait until official reports, although Schefter is saying 8 games.
He'd be back for week 10 (bye in week4)
Wait until official reports, although Schefter is saying 8 games.
He'd be back for week 10 (bye in week4)
Page 57 of 119
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News