Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

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

    Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    For those who may be concerned he's a bad guy. If this has already been posted, pardon the redundancy, but I know I hadn't seen it. The article is from December 2013. Anyway, seems he got a raw deal.

    http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/jason-la-canfora/24310101/the-curious-case-of-brandon-browners-suspension

    Seahawks corner Brandon Browner, a potential unrestricted free agent, is facing a one-year suspension for violating the NFL's substance-abuse policy, and the result of his appeal could pave the way for more widespread litigation against the league.

    Browner was advanced to Stage 3 of the program for “failure to cooperate,” according to a source with knowledge of the situation, for missing a series of drug tests back in 2006 and 2007, when he was in fact out of the league. Sources say Browner claimed he never received any letters notifying him of the missed tests, and, was unaware that he was responsible to continue taking drug tests long after being released by the Broncos and through his time in CFL.

    Browner was unaware of the requests for further tests, but it was those missed tests that advanced him deep into the program to the point where he was facing more lengthy suspensions. Browner faced a four-game suspension back in 2007 (he was released by Denver in July of 2006) but many of the letters and other communication were sent to an old address of a former girlfriend.

    Browner ended up back in the NFL in January of 2011, unaware he was in an advance stage of the drug program, and, according to his official NFL player transaction page, there are no suspensions recorded from his time in Denver. The Seahawks did not know of his status in the program either, upon signing him, sources said, nor did any of the handful of teams who brought Browner in for tryouts prior to him signing in Seattle. Only in August of 2011 did Browner receive a letter from the league notifying him that he was in fact in Stage 3.

    Browner was tested roughly 200 times while back in the league, but did not have a positive result until very recently, when he had a small amount of marijuana in his system, according to a source. However, had he not been escalated to Stage 3 for his missed tests when out of the NFL -- if he was in Stage 2, for instance -- two years of clean tests would have be enough to get him out of the program entirely.

    Will Brandon Browner be suspended for anything?

    Brandon Browner's suspension is tied to drug tests he missed when he was out of football.

    After reviewing the NFL's drug policy, which is available to the public, there are questions as to how the “Continuing Participation” rules in the document would even apply to Browner, given his unique roster circumstances more than seven years ago when his status in the program was being determined as he was released by the Broncos. Browner never played a game for the Broncos after signing as an undrafted free agent in April of 2005, and was placed on IR in 2005 prior to the team cutting down to 65 players. He was then was activated to the roster in February of 2006, for offseason participation, and then waived that July.

    According to the “Continued Participation” section of the NFL/NFLPA drug policy: “A player who enters the Intervention Stages will remain in the Intervention Stages until the player is dismissed or released in accordance with the terms set forth herein. All such players must continue to comply with the conditions of the Intervention Program. Notwithstanding the foregoing, (1) a player who is released and who has not been on a club roster for more than six consecutive regular or post season games (“Never-Rostered Player”) is not required to comply with the terms of his Treatment Plan, if any, or submit himself for Testing until he resigns with a club; and (2) a veteran who is not under contract with a club (“Non-Contract Veteran”) must comply with the conditions of the Intervention Program for a year after the expiration of his last contract or receipt by the Administrator of written notification of his retirement, whichever is sooner. After six months as a Non-Contract Veteran, testing shall cease unless the Medical Director or the Medical Advisor requests that testing be continued. After a veteran who is under contract with a Club (“Contract Veteran”) or a Non-Contract Veteran notifies the Administrator of his retirement from football, he does not have to comply with the terms of his Treatment Plan.”

    Browner's lawyers could argue that he should be considered a “Never-Rostered Player” since he was never on the Broncos roster as anything other than an IR player. And, even if considered a “Non-Contract Veteran,” sources said Browner never received any communications from the league seeking further testing, and according to sources, the NFL's Medical Director does not believe that six-month provision applied to Browner (and unemployed players) in these circumstances. That could be the crux of one of the many legal battles complicating this suspension.

    Browner is fighting his one-year suspension vigorously and with his future earning potential as the top corner available in free agency greatly impacted by any suspension, is prepared to sue the league for its handling of how it notifies and handles a player's drug status once he is terminated. That could have potentially huge ramifications for any other players who have experienced a similar set of circumstances while out of the league and failing to miss tests they were unaware of. Many players might naturally assume that once out of the league, they would no longer be subject to testing from a past employer.

     

     

     

     

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    Muzz,

    this zero tolerance for missed tests is pretty standard in the business community as it also allows for lowered loss insurance and health insurance rates for said business...

    a missed test is a false test...

    seems that Browner accepting the 4 games, he is not completely without wrong doing...but the situation comes with whispers that the offense was pot a couple of times and the missed tests are the reason for suspension....

    if you call, the initial account indicated PED use, but that was later recanted by the league

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension


    Wow, good read. Thanks.

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    Hmmmmm.....missed test is kinda like failure to blow into the breathalyzer....

    Hope he keeps himself on the straight and narrow here.

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    Muzz,

    this zero tolerance for missed tests is pretty standard in the business community as it also allows for lowered loss insurance and health insurance rates for said business...

    a missed test is a false test...

    ...

    Sure, but the missed tests were from 2006-07 when he was playing in Canada and had no idea he was even being asked to take the tests. I don't know what it's like where you work, but I've never heard of a case where a company that you don't even work for would be asking you to take a drug test? Maybe on a Seinfeld episode. 

    It's difficult to come up with an argument that such a requirement is legal.

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:


    Wow, good read. Thanks.



    And now do you see how this red flag is different?

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    In response to TravisBean's comment:

    I didn't read the whole thing, but it appears his suspension last year was retroactive to his time in the league before with Denver?

    If so, that's interesting that the recreational drug rule goes back so far in terms of how many violations are needed to produce suspension. I always thought it was over the course of a full NFL season that you needed to test positive 3 times before being suspended.

     



    Not even. It's a little convoluted, but here goes: He was in Stage 3 of the drug program because he failed to take tests that were scheduled during a time when he was not playing in the NFL (he was playing in the CFL). He never even knew about the tests because the notices were sent to a former girlfriend's address and he never got them.

    He was routinely tested once he came back to the NFL and was tested approx. 200 times. He never tested positive until 2013 (weed). But because he was in Stage 3, he got suspended. If he wasn't in that stage, basically he'd have been warned and told to be a good boy, don't let it happen again.

    He's never tested positive for PEDs, or anything other than the weed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    I heard this story the other day on either the radio or an internet podcast, and the thing I find crazy is the NFL said they sent Browner notices of the test, Browner said he never received notices.  Wouldn't you think these notices would have been sent via certified mail?  Where are the signed proof of delivery? 

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    Muzz,

    this zero tolerance for missed tests is pretty standard in the business community as it also allows for lowered loss insurance and health insurance rates for said business...

    a missed test is a false test...

    ...

    Sure, but the missed tests were from 2006-07 when he was playing in Canada and had no idea he was even being asked to take the tests. I don't know what it's like where you work, but I've never heard of a case where a company that you don't even work for would be asking you to take a drug test? Maybe on a Seinfeld episode. 

    It's difficult to come up with an argument that such a requirement is legal.




    missed tests were step 1 and 2 of a 3 step process...he did fail a drug test while with the Hawks...that was step 3

    the responsibility is with the player in this matter...pleading naievete wont fly...it is in the CBA...zero tolerance

     

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    he missed tests in 2006 while with Denver

    he was notified he was in stage 2 in 2011 while with Seattle

    he was tested and proved positive for step 3 in 2013

    again, the CBA states zero tolderance and naievete is not an excuse...

    when I had my own business, we did offer health insurance to our employees, and we were able to attain much better rates for everyone with a similar drug test provision included.

    if you get called to test, you have 24 hours to submit a test...with the cost of transportation and the cost of the test covered...miss a test, or report after 24 hours is the same as a failed test

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from croc. Show croc's posts

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    ..and that applies after they leave your employment? 

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

     

    Yes, you would think taht this would require a certified letter as it is a legal contrat taht is being enforced

    So in the NFL office it was unclear?

    As i have said in other threads - the NFL is a mismanaged organization in many aspets. this is certainly a braingart by them.. They can get away with it because of the unbeliveable amount of money thrown at it. They think coz they are there, as this money machine happens, that they themselves are the reason for the success. well not so much

    Seems like a technicality at best to me, and I wonder how arbitrators would rule? but it doesnt matter cause he he did his mea culpa and took the 4 games.

    I am not going to worry about Browner

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    good post, interesting read.  That being said, it makes no difference at this time.  The sentence has been handed out.  I doubt the Patriots have any standing or are willing to do anything about it anyway.  Besides, the suspension probably worked in the Patriots' favor money wise. At the end of the day, we need playmakers to be on the field during playoff time.

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    Muzz,

    this zero tolerance for missed tests is pretty standard in the business community as it also allows for lowered loss insurance and health insurance rates for said business...

    a missed test is a false test...

    seems that Browner accepting the 4 games, he is not completely without wrong doing...but the situation comes with whispers that the offense was pot a couple of times and the missed tests are the reason for suspension....

    if you call, the initial account indicated PED use, but that was later recanted by the league



    Did you read the article? I mean no malice, I'm genuinely curious. If you did indeed read it, you'd see that Browner was out of the NFL, in the CFL, and the letters notifying him of missed tests weren't sent to his current address at that time. 

    Do you really think someone who wasn't employed with a business has any reason to continue taking the aforementioned business's drug tests? That seems absurd, and it sure seems like Browner did no wrong. Would seem he tested positive once, and it was for a small amount of pot, which about as benign as it gets. 

    I don't see how anyone could read this and continue to have any ill-will toward Browner. 

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

    In response to TravisBean's comment:

    I didn't read the whole thing, but it appears his suspension last year was retroactive to his time in the league before with Denver?

    If so, that's interesting that the recreational drug rule goes back so far in terms of how many violations are needed to produce suspension. I always thought it was over the course of a full NFL season that you needed to test positive 3 times before being suspended.

     



    Not even. It's a little convoluted, but here goes: He was in Stage 3 of the drug program because he failed to take tests that were scheduled during a time when he was not playing in the NFL (he was playing in the CFL). He never even knew about the tests because the notices were sent to a former girlfriend's address and he never got them.

    He was routinely tested once he came back to the NFL and was tested approx. 200 times. He never tested positive until 2013 (weed). But because he was in Stage 3, he got suspended. If he wasn't in that stage, basically he'd have been warned and told to be a good boy, don't let it happen again.

    He's never tested positive for PEDs, or anything other than the weed.



    Yes, yes, yes. This is exactly correct and how the story is to be interpreted. 

    The guy is clean, none of his success is related to PED use, nor is he a hardcore druggie who has addiction problems. He smoked a litlte pot once, in a state where it's legal. Big whoop -- that's no worse that kicking back with a beer or two in the evening.

    The guy is a stud, and it's because he's a stud, not because he took PEDs. I look forward to seeing what he can do here. 

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    Muzz,

    this zero tolerance for missed tests is pretty standard in the business community as it also allows for lowered loss insurance and health insurance rates for said business...

    a missed test is a false test...

    ...

    Sure, but the missed tests were from 2006-07 when he was playing in Canada and had no idea he was even being asked to take the tests. I don't know what it's like where you work, but I've never heard of a case where a company that you don't even work for would be asking you to take a drug test? Maybe on a Seinfeld episode. 

    It's difficult to come up with an argument that such a requirement is legal.




    missed tests were step 1 and 2 of a 3 step process...he did fail a drug test while with the Hawks...that was step 3

    the responsibility is with the player in this matter...pleading naievete wont fly...it is in the CBA...zero tolerance

     



    Pfft. You're reaching here. 

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    he missed tests in 2006 while with Denver

    he was notified he was in stage 2 in 2011 while with Seattle

    he was tested and proved positive for step 3 in 2013

    again, the CBA states zero tolderance and naievete is not an excuse...

    when I had my own business, we did offer health insurance to our employees, and we were able to attain much better rates for everyone with a similar drug test provision included.

    if you get called to test, you have 24 hours to submit a test...with the cost of transportation and the cost of the test covered...miss a test, or report after 24 hours is the same as a failed test



    I'm somewhat concerned about the fact that you drug-tested your employees. What field were you working in? 

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    http://www.examiner.com/article/the-backstory-on-brandon-browner-s-suspension

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    In response to dreighver's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    Muzz,

    this zero tolerance for missed tests is pretty standard in the business community as it also allows for lowered loss insurance and health insurance rates for said business...

    a missed test is a false test...

    seems that Browner accepting the 4 games, he is not completely without wrong doing...but the situation comes with whispers that the offense was pot a couple of times and the missed tests are the reason for suspension....

    if you call, the initial account indicated PED use, but that was later recanted by the league



    Did you read the article? I mean no malice, I'm genuinely curious. If you did indeed read it, you'd see that Browner was out of the NFL, in the CFL, and the letters notifying him of missed tests weren't sent to his current address at that time. 

    Do you really think someone who wasn't employed with a business has any reason to continue taking the aforementioned business's drug tests? That seems absurd, and it sure seems like Browner did no wrong. Would seem he tested positive once, and it was for a small amount of pot, which about as benign as it gets. 

    I don't see how anyone could read this and continue to have any ill-will toward Browner. 



    I did read the article. It clearly states that in 2011 Browner was notified that he was in the 3rd stage of the drug program. He then violated that stage after his notification 

    His first  2 offenses came in 2006 while a member of the Broncos

    it is not the NFL's responsibility to monitor where every player is living. It is up to the player to stay on top communication with the NFL to avoid these situations, or hire some one to do so for him...

    to dismiss Browner for his lack of understanding the situation is flagrantly sidestepping the rules that were set up to not be side stepped...

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    RKarp, as dreighver asked, did you read the article? It contradicts what you're saying. So, you know something LaCanfora doesn't, or you're saying he's outright lying. It has to be one or the other.

    Quote from the article: "Browner was advanced to Stage 3 of the program for “failure to cooperate,” according to a source with knowledge of the situation, for missing a series of drug tests back in 2006 and 2007, when he was in fact out of the league."

    He did not test positive for anything, until November of 2013 when he tested positive for marijuana. 

    If you have better info than LaCanfora, please do share.

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    In response to dreighver's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    he missed tests in 2006 while with Denver

    he was notified he was in stage 2 in 2011 while with Seattle

    he was tested and proved positive for step 3 in 2013

    again, the CBA states zero tolderance and naievete is not an excuse...

    when I had my own business, we did offer health insurance to our employees, and we were able to attain much better rates for everyone with a similar drug test provision included.

    if you get called to test, you have 24 hours to submit a test...with the cost of transportation and the cost of the test covered...miss a test, or report after 24 hours is the same as a failed test



    I'm somewhat concerned about the fact that you drug-tested your employees. What field were you working in? 



    I did not drug test my employees. Our, not mine, health insurer did..at that time out of Mass we were using Pilgrim Health. 

    I was also factored with CIT, and they lowered my obligations on accounts payable if I had any employee handling any type of finances, if I had the drug test clause, which I happily accepted for better rates.

    regardless if any of my employ wished to use drugs or not, that was not any of my business. However, is any employ of mine was handling my money, or any of my expensive equipment, and they were using drugs, that is my business. Same with workmanship comp insurance we were paying, it was much less if the drug testing was applied...

    sounds harsh, but the numbers presented by each carrier and CIT made it very clear the threat of theft and fraud in business is much higher if drug abuse is involved. It was an absolute no brainer as far as saving went

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    I did read the article. It clearly states that in 2011 Browner was notified that he was in the 3rd stage of the drug program. He then violated that stage after his notification 

    His first  2 offenses came in 2006 while a member of the Broncos

    it is not the NFL's responsibility to monitor where every player is living. It is up to the player to stay on top communication with the NFL to avoid these situations, or hire some one to do so for him...

    to dismiss Browner for his lack of understanding the situation is flagrantly sidestepping the rules that were set up to not be side stepped...



    Yes, he was in stage 3 because he missed tests, that was his offense. My point, the only point here, is that he is in the program because of a rules violation, which violation occurred when he was not in the NFL. He was not in the program due to any positive test. To me, it seems completely crazy that his name is tarnished and his career placed in jeopardy for a technicality, and one that occurred when he didn't even play for an NFL team.

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

    RKarp, as dreighver asked, did you read the article? It contradicts what you're saying. So, you know something LaCanfora doesn't, or you're saying he's outright lying. It has to be one or the other.

    Quote from the article: "Browner was advanced to Stage 3 of the program for “failure to cooperate,” according to a source with knowledge of the situation, for missing a series of drug tests back in 2006 and 2007, when he was in fact out of the league."

    He did not test positive for anything, until November of 2013 when he tested positive for marijuana. 

    If you have better info than LaCanfora, please do share.




    Hard to cooperate with something that makes no logical sense...

    When Browner left the league for the CFL,  he left their ridiculous heavy handed jurisdiction.  End of story.   Over.  Time has passed.  Suspension?   He assumed "banishment" posture by leaving.  


    Trying to hold this over him years later is abusive not to mention a violation of rights.  Particularly if it is over a legal and medicinal "substance" ,  marijuana.

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

    RKarp, as dreighver asked, did you read the article? It contradicts what you're saying. So, you know something LaCanfora doesn't, or you're saying he's outright lying. It has to be one or the other.

    Quote from the article: "Browner was advanced to Stage 3 of the program for “failure to cooperate,” according to a source with knowledge of the situation, for missing a series of drug tests back in 2006 and 2007, when he was in fact out of the league."

    He did not test positive for anything, until November of 2013 when he tested positive for marijuana. 

    If you have better info than LaCanfora, please do share.



    Browner was with the Broncos from August of 2005 to July of 2006. He was on IR, but was still an employee of the broncos, and league rules applied. He missed 2 tests during that time period, resulting in 2 "failed test" scores...

    Browner, upon re entering the NFL in 2011 was notified that he was at that time in the 3rd stage of the NFL drug program, and another missed or failing test would result in suspension per the agreement in the CBA.

    Browner did fail another test, actually failed, not missed, and was suspended. the Seahawks did not appeal. Browner appealed not that he failed a test, but he appealed that he was unaware it was a 3rd failing. 

    He appealed his suspension, but has dropped it and is accepting the 4 games. 

     

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

    Re: Curious Case of Browner's Suspension

    Veering off topic here for a moment, there are professions where pre-employment drug screening and periodic random testing is appropriate.  Public safety and public safety-related occupations, heavy equipment operation, transportation to name just a few.  In Connecticut an employer needs specific written authorization to conduct random testing, the testing must be position-specific and detailed justification for the testing is required.  The nature of procedural randomness is rather stringently controlled as well.

    In the Browner case, we are talking about technical violations not test-postive violations that is decidedly not a distinction without a difference (pardon the double negative).  I am not at all concerned about him.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share