Browns Gordon suspended for the year

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonSportsFan111. Show BostonSportsFan111's posts

    Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    They need WR help, we have a plethora of WRs. Go get a DL or LB...


    http://sports.yahoo.com/news/browns-wr-gordon-suspended-2014-165452986--nfl.html" rel="nofollow">http://sports.yahoo.com/news/browns-wr-gordon-suspended-2014-165452986--nfl.html


     



     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    amendola straight up for Phil Taylor. 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    In response to Philskiw1's comment:




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    Will need to get their GM drunk and maybe high but I would do that everyday 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:




    a blow...game changing talent lost...feel bad Hoyer being named starter and losing star WR in same week but I have the feeling they knew this was coming

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonSportsFan111. Show BostonSportsFan111's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    In response to Philskiw1's comment:




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    Will need to get their GM drunk and maybe high but I would do that everyday 



    Send in the Rusty one...


     

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    In response to Philskiw1's comment:




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    Will need to get their GM drunk and maybe high but I would do that everyday 



    Send in the Rusty one...


     

     




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    heck send in Irsay

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonSportsFan111. Show BostonSportsFan111's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    Irsay is still mad about the Richardson trade. Probably what sent him over the edge...


     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from coolade2. Show coolade2's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    Moral of the story ...  If you are peeing in a cup,  you're screwed .  Good luck. 

    Time for a little amendment to the CBA.  Not sure who the legal wizards working for the players were but agreeing to this protocol was about the dumbest thing ever negotiated in NFL history.  Getting suspended and bilked a year's salary for a trace of substance that is legal (like alcohol) in 2 states that have NFL teams.   Fokking brilliant.  Oh yeah and it is used widely by many players for pain relief from the game itself.  

    the dumbest thing is how is the NFL served by this...?   Losing star players is bad for business,  ya think?  

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonSportsFan111. Show BostonSportsFan111's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    Moral of the story ...  If you are peeing in a cup,  you're screwed .  Good luck. 

    Time for a little amendment to the CBA.  Not sure who the legal wizards working for the players were but agreeing to this protocol was about the dumbest thing ever negotiated in NFL history.  Getting suspended and bilked a year's salary for a trace of substance that is legal (like alcohol) in 2 states that have NFL teams.   Fokking brilliant.  Oh yeah and it is used widely by many players for pain relief from the game itself.  

    the dumbest thing is how is the NFL served by this...?   Losing star players is bad for business,  ya think?  



    Or maybe, accept that if one of the conditions for employment in a certain job states you can't smoke weed, then don't smoke weed. Some of us who make a hell of a lot less than these athletes are subject to those rules. We handle it just fine.


     

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    Moral of the story ...  If you are peeing in a cup,  you're screwed .  Good luck. 

    Time for a little amendment to the CBA.  Not sure who the legal wizards working for the players were but agreeing to this protocol was about the dumbest thing ever negotiated in NFL history.  Getting suspended and bilked a year's salary for a trace of substance that is legal (like alcohol) in 2 states that have NFL teams.   Fokking brilliant.  Oh yeah and it is used widely by many players for pain relief from the game itself.  

    the dumbest thing is how is the NFL served by this...?   Losing star players is bad for business,  ya think?  



    Or maybe, accept that if one of the conditions for employment in a certain job states you can't smoke weed, then don't smoke weed. Some of us who make a hell of a lot less than these athletes are subject to those rules. We handle it just fine.

    Exactly.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from m. a. pat. Show m. a. pat's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    ^ What he said.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    Well, rape is a crime so how about if you rape an ugly chick no suspension or if you stab a guy to death that's ok only gun murders equal a suspension.

    how about posting stoned equals a 1 day suspension.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from coolade2. Show coolade2's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    Moral of the story ...  If you are peeing in a cup,  you're screwed .  Good luck. 

    Time for a little amendment to the CBA.  Not sure who the legal wizards working for the players were but agreeing to this protocol was about the dumbest thing ever negotiated in NFL history.  Getting suspended and bilked a year's salary for a trace of substance that is legal (like alcohol) in 2 states that have NFL teams.   Fokking brilliant.  Oh yeah and it is used widely by many players for pain relief from the game itself.  

    the dumbest thing is how is the NFL served by this...?   Losing star players is bad for business,  ya think?  



    Or maybe, accept that if one of the conditions for employment in a certain job states you can't smoke weed, then don't smoke weed. Some of us who make a hell of a lot less than these athletes are subject to those rules. We handle it just fine.

    Exactly.



    You do realize that after the pee in the cup leaves your hand you have lost all your rights concerning control over the process or analysis of that pee...?  AND your basic right of privacy which is in the constitution

    (Seventh Article: "The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures..shall not be violated")

    by the way.

     You now must put your faith (and your career) in the employer and the testing lab and the people that are running this process.  AS in mistakes are made.  And Employers should not have this control over people that play a game for a living.

    If you are flying planes or running cranes that can kill people , OF COURSE, but Employers who do this as a matter of course for dubious or ulterior reasons should be stopped.  Not that they will.  perhaps you guys are the pee collectors rather than the pee-ers.  It really depends what your perspective is, but can we just respect the constitution of this country as a starting point...?   Thanks.

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    Moral of the story ...  If you are peeing in a cup,  you're screwed .  Good luck. 

    Time for a little amendment to the CBA.  Not sure who the legal wizards working for the players were but agreeing to this protocol was about the dumbest thing ever negotiated in NFL history.  Getting suspended and bilked a year's salary for a trace of substance that is legal (like alcohol) in 2 states that have NFL teams.   Fokking brilliant.  Oh yeah and it is used widely by many players for pain relief from the game itself.  

    the dumbest thing is how is the NFL served by this...?   Losing star players is bad for business,  ya think?  



    Or maybe, accept that if one of the conditions for employment in a certain job states you can't smoke weed, then don't smoke weed. Some of us who make a hell of a lot less than these athletes are subject to those rules. We handle it just fine.

    Rules are the rules.  You can't pick and chose the ones you want to abide by because you feel they are right or because you feel you are special and they do not apply to you.

    [object HTMLDivElement]

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonSportsFan111. Show BostonSportsFan111's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    Moral of the story ...  If you are peeing in a cup,  you're screwed .  Good luck. 

    Time for a little amendment to the CBA.  Not sure who the legal wizards working for the players were but agreeing to this protocol was about the dumbest thing ever negotiated in NFL history.  Getting suspended and bilked a year's salary for a trace of substance that is legal (like alcohol) in 2 states that have NFL teams.   Fokking brilliant.  Oh yeah and it is used widely by many players for pain relief from the game itself.  

    the dumbest thing is how is the NFL served by this...?   Losing star players is bad for business,  ya think?  



    Or maybe, accept that if one of the conditions for employment in a certain job states you can't smoke weed, then don't smoke weed. Some of us who make a hell of a lot less than these athletes are subject to those rules. We handle it just fine.

    Exactly.



    You do realize that after the pee in the cup leaves your hand you have lost all your rights concerning control over the process or analysis of that pee...?  AND your basic right of privacy which is in the constitution

    (Seventh Article: "The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures..shall not be violated")

    by the way.

     You now must put your faith (and your career) in the employer and the testing lab and the people that are running this process.  AS in mistakes are made.  And Employers should not have this control over people that play a game for a living.

    If you are flying planes or running cranes that can kill people , OF COURSE, but Employers who do this as a matter of course for dubious or ulterior reasons should be stopped.  Not that they will.  perhaps you guys are the pee collectors rather than the pee-ers.  It really depends what your perspective is, but can we just respect the constitution of this country as a starting point...?   Thanks.

     



    If his constitutional rights are that important to him, he can go find employment where taking and passing a drug test is not a requirement. It is not an unreasonable search or seizure, it is a condition that the employer requires in order to work in the position. Its that simple. What if they didn't test. What if he then decided to go blow a fatty an hour before kickoff. Do you honestly believe there is a 0% chance that it would affect his ability to concentrate and perform at the same level in the game than if he did not? You are lying to yourself if you believe that. What if that little bit of concentration loss led to him dropping a key pass in a key situation that cost his team a game, that changed the standings and allowed another team make the playoffs? There are reasons these rules are in place and that the union agreed to them. 


     

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from coolade2. Show coolade2's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    In response to agcsbill's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    Moral of the story ...  If you are peeing in a cup,  you're screwed .  Good luck. 

    Time for a little amendment to the CBA.  Not sure who the legal wizards working for the players were but agreeing to this protocol was about the dumbest thing ever negotiated in NFL history.  Getting suspended and bilked a year's salary for a trace of substance that is legal (like alcohol) in 2 states that have NFL teams.   Fokking brilliant.  Oh yeah and it is used widely by many players for pain relief from the game itself.  

    the dumbest thing is how is the NFL served by this...?   Losing star players is bad for business,  ya think?  



    Or maybe, accept that if one of the conditions for employment in a certain job states you can't smoke weed, then don't smoke weed. Some of us who make a hell of a lot less than these athletes are subject to those rules. We handle it just fine.

    Rules are the rules.  You can't pick and chose the ones you want to abide by because you feel they are right or because you feel you are special and they do not apply to you.

    [object HTMLDivElement]

    Agreed...  however,

    The rules suck.  this discussion (my post) is just to express that Josh Gordon, the Cleveland Browns , the fans are being screwed by the NFL.  For what ?   because of a trace of weed.   It wasnt even clear that the threshold which is miniscule, could be exceeded by second hand smoke or not.  Second offense?  Really ...  2 traces don't add up to much in the mind of a reasonable person.  People that abuse authority can make a big deal about anything.

    The players need to get this protocol changed in the CBA.  But the league ,curiously, had the opportunity to knock down this penalty to 2 games which is what Ray Rice got for abusing his GF,  and they didn't after dragging it out .  That is the bigger issue.   A trace of weed is harmless  vs.  actual violence.  

    Explain that...  

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    Moral of the story ...  If you are peeing in a cup,  you're screwed .  Good luck. 

    Time for a little amendment to the CBA.  Not sure who the legal wizards working for the players were but agreeing to this protocol was about the dumbest thing ever negotiated in NFL history.  Getting suspended and bilked a year's salary for a trace of substance that is legal (like alcohol) in 2 states that have NFL teams.   Fokking brilliant.  Oh yeah and it is used widely by many players for pain relief from the game itself.  

    the dumbest thing is how is the NFL served by this...?   Losing star players is bad for business,  ya think?  



    Or maybe, accept that if one of the conditions for employment in a certain job states you can't smoke weed, then don't smoke weed. Some of us who make a hell of a lot less than these athletes are subject to those rules. We handle it just fine.

    Exactly.



    You do realize that after the pee in the cup leaves your hand you have lost all your rights concerning control over the process or analysis of that pee...?  AND your basic right of privacy which is in the constitution

    (Seventh Article: "The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures..shall not be violated")

    by the way.

     You now must put your faith (and your career) in the employer and the testing lab and the people that are running this process.  AS in mistakes are made.  And Employers should not have this control over people that play a game for a living.

    If you are flying planes or running cranes that can kill people , OF COURSE, but Employers who do this as a matter of course for dubious or ulterior reasons should be stopped.  Not that they will.  perhaps you guys are the pee collectors rather than the pee-ers.  It really depends what your perspective is, but can we just respect the constitution of this country as a starting point...?   Thanks.



    I'm an employer.  I require a pre-employment 10-panel drug screening.  All of my employees are subject to random testing throughout the term of their employment.  It is a condition of employment here.  This kind of testing, in the State of Connecticut, requires specific authorization from the state to conduct it.  I have such authorization.  All of my employees know the rules before they become my employees.  If they don't wish to conform to these rules, that's not problem; they simply can't work here.

    Don't raise the subject of constitutional protections.  The Constitution protects individuals from unreasonable search and seizures by governmental entities; it does not apply to employers.

    Always helpful to have a reasonable command of the facts before publicly pursuing your agenda.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from coolade2. Show coolade2's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    Moral of the story ...  If you are peeing in a cup,  you're screwed .  Good luck. 

    Time for a little amendment to the CBA.  Not sure who the legal wizards working for the players were but agreeing to this protocol was about the dumbest thing ever negotiated in NFL history.  Getting suspended and bilked a year's salary for a trace of substance that is legal (like alcohol) in 2 states that have NFL teams.   Fokking brilliant.  Oh yeah and it is used widely by many players for pain relief from the game itself.  

    the dumbest thing is how is the NFL served by this...?   Losing star players is bad for business,  ya think?  



    Or maybe, accept that if one of the conditions for employment in a certain job states you can't smoke weed, then don't smoke weed. Some of us who make a hell of a lot less than these athletes are subject to those rules. We handle it just fine.

    Exactly.



    You do realize that after the pee in the cup leaves your hand you have lost all your rights concerning control over the process or analysis of that pee...?  AND your basic right of privacy which is in the constitution

    (Seventh Article: "The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures..shall not be violated")

    by the way.

     You now must put your faith (and your career) in the employer and the testing lab and the people that are running this process.  AS in mistakes are made.  And Employers should not have this control over people that play a game for a living.

    If you are flying planes or running cranes that can kill people , OF COURSE, but Employers who do this as a matter of course for dubious or ulterior reasons should be stopped.  Not that they will.  perhaps you guys are the pee collectors rather than the pee-ers.  It really depends what your perspective is, but can we just respect the constitution of this country as a starting point...?   Thanks.



    I'm an employer.  I require a pre-employment 10-panel drug screening.  All of my employees are subject to random testing throughout the term of their employment.  It is a condition of employment here.  This kind of testing, in the State of Connecticut, requires specific authorization from the state to conduct it.  I have such authorization.  All of my employees know the rules before they become my employees.  If they don't wish to conform to these rules, that's not problem; they simply can't work here.

    Don't raise the subject of constitutional protections.  The Constitution protects individuals from unreasonable search and seizures by governmental entities; it does not apply to employers.

    Always helpful to have a reasonable command of the facts before publicly pursuing your agenda.



    What is the reason that you are violating your employees constitutional rights?  Because you can?  

     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonSportsFan111. Show BostonSportsFan111's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    October, 2010 - Gordon was suspended from his college team for possession of marijuana.

    July, 2011 - Gordon was suspended from his team indefintely for failing a drug test.

    June, 2013 - Gordon suspended for 2 games by the NFL for violating the drug policy. 

    July 5, 2014 - Gorden arrested for driving while impaired. 

    August, 2014 - Gordon suspended for the year by the NFL for 2nd violation of the drug policy. 

    Sounds more like the Browns and their fans are being screwed by Josh Gordon...


     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    Moral of the story ...  If you are peeing in a cup,  you're screwed .  Good luck. 

    Time for a little amendment to the CBA.  Not sure who the legal wizards working for the players were but agreeing to this protocol was about the dumbest thing ever negotiated in NFL history.  Getting suspended and bilked a year's salary for a trace of substance that is legal (like alcohol) in 2 states that have NFL teams.   Fokking brilliant.  Oh yeah and it is used widely by many players for pain relief from the game itself.  

    the dumbest thing is how is the NFL served by this...?   Losing star players is bad for business,  ya think?  



    Or maybe, accept that if one of the conditions for employment in a certain job states you can't smoke weed, then don't smoke weed. Some of us who make a hell of a lot less than these athletes are subject to those rules. We handle it just fine.

    Exactly.



    You do realize that after the pee in the cup leaves your hand you have lost all your rights concerning control over the process or analysis of that pee...?  AND your basic right of privacy which is in the constitution

    (Seventh Article: "The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures..shall not be violated")

    by the way.

     You now must put your faith (and your career) in the employer and the testing lab and the people that are running this process.  AS in mistakes are made.  And Employers should not have this control over people that play a game for a living.

    If you are flying planes or running cranes that can kill people , OF COURSE, but Employers who do this as a matter of course for dubious or ulterior reasons should be stopped.  Not that they will.  perhaps you guys are the pee collectors rather than the pee-ers.  It really depends what your perspective is, but can we just respect the constitution of this country as a starting point...?   Thanks.



    I'm an employer.  I require a pre-employment 10-panel drug screening.  All of my employees are subject to random testing throughout the term of their employment.  It is a condition of employment here.  This kind of testing, in the State of Connecticut, requires specific authorization from the state to conduct it.  I have such authorization.  All of my employees know the rules before they become my employees.  If they don't wish to conform to these rules, that's not problem; they simply can't work here.

    Don't raise the subject of constitutional protections.  The Constitution protects individuals from unreasonable search and seizures by governmental entities; it does not apply to employers.

    Always helpful to have a reasonable command of the facts before publicly pursuing your agenda.



    What is the reason that you are violating your employees constitutional rights?  Because you can?  



    Do try to pay attention - seriously.  What part of this sentence was confusing to you:  The Constitution protects individuals from unreasonable search and seizures by governmental entities; it does not apply to employers.

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from CablesWyndBairn. Show CablesWyndBairn's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    Can we stop feeling bad for Josh Gordon, or any NFL player for that matter, for not adhering to the requirements of the league he/they play(s) for?  Here is a guy who clearly made some bad life choices and has all the power to avoid the situations that have led to this suspension.  It's not an isolated incident and he's realising the consequences for his actions.  No one is responsible for this situation but the man himself.  That he stands to lose a lot of money tells me that he is ignorant, arrogant or both. 


    To the BDC constitutional law experts, you'll have to forgive the rest of us if we have a hard time feeling bad for a guy who willingly chooses to smoke pot (or be in close proximity to those that do), drink and drive and play a game of chicken with his employers and the league.  The rest of us who make fraction of what he'll make this year and who still have to be responsible enough to hold a job or not get bange d up with a DUI realise that being accountable to yourself is where it starts.


    End of rant, and I refuse to be sympathetic to any soft story surrounding Gordon.  This isn't about anything else but his bad judgement. 




     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from coolade2. Show coolade2's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    Moral of the story ...  If you are peeing in a cup,  you're screwed .  Good luck. 

    Time for a little amendment to the CBA.  Not sure who the legal wizards working for the players were but agreeing to this protocol was about the dumbest thing ever negotiated in NFL history.  Getting suspended and bilked a year's salary for a trace of substance that is legal (like alcohol) in 2 states that have NFL teams.   Fokking brilliant.  Oh yeah and it is used widely by many players for pain relief from the game itself.  

    the dumbest thing is how is the NFL served by this...?   Losing star players is bad for business,  ya think?  



    Or maybe, accept that if one of the conditions for employment in a certain job states you can't smoke weed, then don't smoke weed. Some of us who make a hell of a lot less than these athletes are subject to those rules. We handle it just fine.

    Exactly.



    You do realize that after the pee in the cup leaves your hand you have lost all your rights concerning control over the process or analysis of that pee...?  AND your basic right of privacy which is in the constitution

    (Seventh Article: "The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures..shall not be violated")

    by the way.

     You now must put your faith (and your career) in the employer and the testing lab and the people that are running this process.  AS in mistakes are made.  And Employers should not have this control over people that play a game for a living.

    If you are flying planes or running cranes that can kill people , OF COURSE, but Employers who do this as a matter of course for dubious or ulterior reasons should be stopped.  Not that they will.  perhaps you guys are the pee collectors rather than the pee-ers.  It really depends what your perspective is, but can we just respect the constitution of this country as a starting point...?   Thanks.

     



    If his constitutional rights are that important to him, he can go find employment where taking and passing a drug test is not a requirement. It is not an unreasonable search or seizure, it is a condition that the employer requires in order to work in the position. Its that simple. What if they didn't test. What if he then decided to go blow a fatty an hour before kickoff. Do you honestly believe there is a 0% chance that it would affect his ability to concentrate and perform at the same level in the game than if he did not? You are lying to yourself if you believe that. What if that little bit of concentration loss led to him dropping a key pass in a key situation that cost his team a game, that changed the standings and allowed another team make the playoffs? There are reasons these rules are in place and that the union agreed to them. 


     

     



    If you lead the league in recieving,  you can rest assured that the player was not abusing a substance that would cause impairment.  Is that what it looked like to you when he dusted Talib for that long TD?

    Um.  there is this law concerning Medicinal Marijuana...?  Most people use it for pain relief and relaxation, in particular muscle pain and tightness. the NFL and their supporters on this issue have their heads up their aszes.

    Anyway,  I agree there should be rules to prevent abuse . and in this case the rules are over-punishing the player for a trace reading .   Clearly it is a repeated violation but the point is that the violations are miniscule and don't add up to anything when you look at the evidence on the field.  He appparently is using it medicinally like most players.

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonSportsFan111. Show BostonSportsFan111's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    Moral of the story ...  If you are peeing in a cup,  you're screwed .  Good luck. 

    Time for a little amendment to the CBA.  Not sure who the legal wizards working for the players were but agreeing to this protocol was about the dumbest thing ever negotiated in NFL history.  Getting suspended and bilked a year's salary for a trace of substance that is legal (like alcohol) in 2 states that have NFL teams.   Fokking brilliant.  Oh yeah and it is used widely by many players for pain relief from the game itself.  

    the dumbest thing is how is the NFL served by this...?   Losing star players is bad for business,  ya think?  



    Or maybe, accept that if one of the conditions for employment in a certain job states you can't smoke weed, then don't smoke weed. Some of us who make a hell of a lot less than these athletes are subject to those rules. We handle it just fine.

    Exactly.



    You do realize that after the pee in the cup leaves your hand you have lost all your rights concerning control over the process or analysis of that pee...?  AND your basic right of privacy which is in the constitution

    (Seventh Article: "The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures..shall not be violated")

    by the way.

     You now must put your faith (and your career) in the employer and the testing lab and the people that are running this process.  AS in mistakes are made.  And Employers should not have this control over people that play a game for a living.

    If you are flying planes or running cranes that can kill people , OF COURSE, but Employers who do this as a matter of course for dubious or ulterior reasons should be stopped.  Not that they will.  perhaps you guys are the pee collectors rather than the pee-ers.  It really depends what your perspective is, but can we just respect the constitution of this country as a starting point...?   Thanks.

     



    If his constitutional rights are that important to him, he can go find employment where taking and passing a drug test is not a requirement. It is not an unreasonable search or seizure, it is a condition that the employer requires in order to work in the position. Its that simple. What if they didn't test. What if he then decided to go blow a fatty an hour before kickoff. Do you honestly believe there is a 0% chance that it would affect his ability to concentrate and perform at the same level in the game than if he did not? You are lying to yourself if you believe that. What if that little bit of concentration loss led to him dropping a key pass in a key situation that cost his team a game, that changed the standings and allowed another team make the playoffs? There are reasons these rules are in place and that the union agreed to them. 


     

     



    If you lead the league in recieving,  you can rest assured that the player was not abusing a substance that would cause impairment.  Is that what it looked like to you when he dusted Talib for that long TD?

    Um.  there is this law concerning Medicinal Marijuana...?  Most people use it for pain relief and relaxation, in particular muscle pain and tightness. the NFL and their supporters on this issue have their heads up their aszes.

    Anyway,  I agree there should be rules to prevent abuse . and in this case the rules are over-punishing the player for a trace reading .   Clearly it is a repeated violation but the point is that the violations are miniscule and don't add up to anything when you look at the evidence on the field.  He appparently is using it medicinally like most players.

     

    You can make whatever pro-marijuana arguments you like, there are valid reasons why the NFL (and many other employers) decide that they do not want to employ people who test positive for using weed and other drugs. He has had a violation of some sort almost every year going back to 2010, that is a long pattern, including driving while impaired just last month. It is HIS choice to continue with this behavior that is penalizing his team and their fans. He could choose to handle things in a manner that is in line with league policies. He could choose to take an acetaminophen for pain and to meditate for relaxation. Those, and many other options, are perfectly acceptable by the league. He chooses to continue to do something that is against what the league has determined is OK. 

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from coolade2. Show coolade2's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    Moral of the story ...  If you are peeing in a cup,  you're screwed .  Good luck. 

    Time for a little amendment to the CBA.  Not sure who the legal wizards working for the players were but agreeing to this protocol was about the dumbest thing ever negotiated in NFL history.  Getting suspended and bilked a year's salary for a trace of substance that is legal (like alcohol) in 2 states that have NFL teams.   Fokking brilliant.  Oh yeah and it is used widely by many players for pain relief from the game itself.  

    the dumbest thing is how is the NFL served by this...?   Losing star players is bad for business,  ya think?  



    Or maybe, accept that if one of the conditions for employment in a certain job states you can't smoke weed, then don't smoke weed. Some of us who make a hell of a lot less than these athletes are subject to those rules. We handle it just fine.

    Exactly.



    You do realize that after the pee in the cup leaves your hand you have lost all your rights concerning control over the process or analysis of that pee...?  AND your basic right of privacy which is in the constitution

    (Seventh Article: "The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures..shall not be violated")

    by the way.

     You now must put your faith (and your career) in the employer and the testing lab and the people that are running this process.  AS in mistakes are made.  And Employers should not have this control over people that play a game for a living.

    If you are flying planes or running cranes that can kill people , OF COURSE, but Employers who do this as a matter of course for dubious or ulterior reasons should be stopped.  Not that they will.  perhaps you guys are the pee collectors rather than the pee-ers.  It really depends what your perspective is, but can we just respect the constitution of this country as a starting point...?   Thanks.

     



    If his constitutional rights are that important to him, he can go find employment where taking and passing a drug test is not a requirement. It is not an unreasonable search or seizure, it is a condition that the employer requires in order to work in the position. Its that simple. What if they didn't test. What if he then decided to go blow a fatty an hour before kickoff. Do you honestly believe there is a 0% chance that it would affect his ability to concentrate and perform at the same level in the game than if he did not? You are lying to yourself if you believe that. What if that little bit of concentration loss led to him dropping a key pass in a key situation that cost his team a game, that changed the standings and allowed another team make the playoffs? There are reasons these rules are in place and that the union agreed to them. 


     

     



    If you lead the league in recieving,  you can rest assured that the player was not abusing a substance that would cause impairment.  Is that what it looked like to you when he dusted Talib for that long TD?

    Um.  there is this law concerning Medicinal Marijuana...?  Most people use it for pain relief and relaxation, in particular muscle pain and tightness. the NFL and their supporters on this issue have their heads up their aszes.

    Anyway,  I agree there should be rules to prevent abuse . and in this case the rules are over-punishing the player for a trace reading .   Clearly it is a repeated violation but the point is that the violations are miniscule and don't add up to anything when you look at the evidence on the field.  He appparently is using it medicinally like most players.

     

    You can make whatever pro-marijuana arguments you like, there are valid reasons why the NFL (and many other employers) decide that they do not want to employ people who test positive for using weed and other drugs. He has had a violation of some sort almost every year going back to 2010, that is a long pattern, including driving while impaired just last month. It is HIS choice to continue with this behavior that is penalizing his team and their fans. He could choose to handle things in a manner that is in line with league policies. He could choose to take an acetaminophen for pain and to meditate for relaxation. Those, and many other options, are perfectly acceptable by the league. He chooses to continue to do something that is against what the league has determined is OK. 




    Understood...   I was just interested in what the reasons are, in the current climate of laws and understanding of the effects and medicinal uses that help people.   If you say zero tolerance for trace amounts then you should have a dangerous substance not a legal one.   Make the punishment and policy fair to people who are not harming anything but merely making their life more tolerable as they see fit within the law.  THere is a difference between having a trace show up in your system and being under the influence of something.  Pot apparently can stay in your system for days.    Explain the fairness in that.  

    In actuality,  An employer can dictate what you do when you are not working... ?  Um...  not even ATJ can justfy that one.  

     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Browns Gordon suspended for the year

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    In response to BostonSportsFan111's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    Moral of the story ...  If you are peeing in a cup,  you're screwed .  Good luck. 

    Time for a little amendment to the CBA.  Not sure who the legal wizards working for the players were but agreeing to this protocol was about the dumbest thing ever negotiated in NFL history.  Getting suspended and bilked a year's salary for a trace of substance that is legal (like alcohol) in 2 states that have NFL teams.   Fokking brilliant.  Oh yeah and it is used widely by many players for pain relief from the game itself.  

    the dumbest thing is how is the NFL served by this...?   Losing star players is bad for business,  ya think?  



    Or maybe, accept that if one of the conditions for employment in a certain job states you can't smoke weed, then don't smoke weed. Some of us who make a hell of a lot less than these athletes are subject to those rules. We handle it just fine.

    Exactly.



    You do realize that after the pee in the cup leaves your hand you have lost all your rights concerning control over the process or analysis of that pee...?  AND your basic right of privacy which is in the constitution

    (Seventh Article: "The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures..shall not be violated")

    by the way.

     You now must put your faith (and your career) in the employer and the testing lab and the people that are running this process.  AS in mistakes are made.  And Employers should not have this control over people that play a game for a living.

    If you are flying planes or running cranes that can kill people , OF COURSE, but Employers who do this as a matter of course for dubious or ulterior reasons should be stopped.  Not that they will.  perhaps you guys are the pee collectors rather than the pee-ers.  It really depends what your perspective is, but can we just respect the constitution of this country as a starting point...?   Thanks.

     



    If his constitutional rights are that important to him, he can go find employment where taking and passing a drug test is not a requirement. It is not an unreasonable search or seizure, it is a condition that the employer requires in order to work in the position. Its that simple. What if they didn't test. What if he then decided to go blow a fatty an hour before kickoff. Do you honestly believe there is a 0% chance that it would affect his ability to concentrate and perform at the same level in the game than if he did not? You are lying to yourself if you believe that. What if that little bit of concentration loss led to him dropping a key pass in a key situation that cost his team a game, that changed the standings and allowed another team make the playoffs? There are reasons these rules are in place and that the union agreed to them. 


     

     



    If you lead the league in recieving,  you can rest assured that the player was not abusing a substance that would cause impairment.  Is that what it looked like to you when he dusted Talib for that long TD?

    Um.  there is this law concerning Medicinal Marijuana...?  Most people use it for pain relief and relaxation, in particular muscle pain and tightness. the NFL and their supporters on this issue have their heads up their aszes.

    Anyway,  I agree there should be rules to prevent abuse . and in this case the rules are over-punishing the player for a trace reading .   Clearly it is a repeated violation but the point is that the violations are miniscule and don't add up to anything when you look at the evidence on the field.  He appparently is using it medicinally like most players.

     

    You can make whatever pro-marijuana arguments you like, there are valid reasons why the NFL (and many other employers) decide that they do not want to employ people who test positive for using weed and other drugs. He has had a violation of some sort almost every year going back to 2010, that is a long pattern, including driving while impaired just last month. It is HIS choice to continue with this behavior that is penalizing his team and their fans. He could choose to handle things in a manner that is in line with league policies. He could choose to take an acetaminophen for pain and to meditate for relaxation. Those, and many other options, are perfectly acceptable by the league. He chooses to continue to do something that is against what the league has determined is OK. 




    Understood...   I was just interested in what the reasons are, in the current climate of laws and understanding of the effects and medicinal uses that help people.   If you say zero tolerance for trace amounts then you should have a dangerous substance not a legal one.   Make the punishment and policy fair to people who are not harming anything but merely making their life more tolerable as they see fit within the law.  THere is a difference between having a trace show up in your system and being under the influence of something.  Pot apparently can stay in your system for days.    Explain the fairness in that.  

    In actuality,  An employer can dictate what you do when you are not working... ?  Um...  not even ATJ can justfy that one.  

     




    100% agree...always be wary of the "law and order" types

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share