FireChan Posted January 29, 2015 Posted January 29, 2015 It depends on what the real story is. Personally, if the guy is not known to have a drinking problem, and it's not illegal, and he is made to agree to not drink at all during the season in order for him to be re-instated, then they should just randomly check him. They shouldn't try to nail him waiting in Vegas. That's my personal viewpoint. I have no sympathy or love for Josh Gordon. I'm only going by what I think is fair. I said before this letter came out that it was stupid and unfair for the league to tell him he couldn't have a drink, or a few. It's not illegal. There is no indication he had a drinking problem. I don;t know the real terms of the agreement. His argument, which is entirely believable to me, that he didn't think he could be tested at any time. That the drinking ban ended when the season ended. It was a requirement for his reinstatement and his suspension to be dropped by a couple games. Maybe that was just an excuse. Maybe not. It's believable both ways. Maybe after multiple offenses, he should've checked the rules.You know, tread lightly after getting in trouble multiple times. I doubt the NFL wouldn't have cleared up this misconception if he asked.
Cleveland Rocks? Posted January 29, 2015 Posted January 29, 2015 (edited) It depends on what the real story is. Personally, if the guy is not known to have a drinking problem, and it's not illegal, and he is made to agree to not drink at all during the season in order for him to be re-instated, then they should just randomly check him. They shouldn't try to nail him waiting in Vegas. That's my personal viewpoint. I have no sympathy or love for Josh Gordon. I'm only going by what I think is fair. I said before this letter came out that it was stupid and unfair for the league to tell him he couldn't have a drink, or a few. It's not illegal. There is no indication he had a drinking problem. I don;t know the real terms of the agreement. His argument, which is entirely believable to me, that he didn't think he could be tested at any time. That the drinking ban ended when the season ended. It was a requirement for his reinstatement and his suspension to be dropped by a couple games. Maybe that was just an excuse. Maybe not. It's believable both ways. I don’t care if it was a sip of wine at church, its stupid. He has had what feels like a million chances now. His stupidity is a slap in everyone’s face, especially fans of the Browns who have to put up with moron after moron after moron. What would you give up to make millions of dollars and play football for a living? Because I know I would probably have no problem never drinking a glass of wine until after I retire if I'm not addicted. He has - what - 5-10 years to maximize his NFL career? He has the rest of his life to drink/smoke as much as he wants. The NFL deserves a lot of crap for a lot of different reasons but this isn’t one of them in my opinion. The rules are too strict? The rules are the rules. JG isn’t able to follow them for more than a month at a time. I'm a Browns fan and I don't want him back on my team, it’s obvious to many that he doesn’t give a crap about the team. Blaming the NFL for JG's suspension is actually enabling JG and probably further inhibiting his ability to accept the help being offered to him. Edited January 29, 2015 by Cleveland Rocks?
Kelly the Dog Posted January 29, 2015 Posted January 29, 2015 Maybe after multiple offenses, he should've checked the rules.You know, tread lightly after getting in trouble multiple times. I doubt the NFL wouldn't have cleared up this misconception if he asked. He explicitly said he should have done that in his letter, even though according to him, the league said he had to abstain from the drinking for the rest of the season only. Upon landing, I received the all-too-familiar notice by phone that I was to report to a testing location within four hours. I failed the test, obviously, and the rest is history … colored by media speculation and faux outrage. In the end, of course, I failed myself. It doesn’t matter if I thought that the league-imposed restriction on drinking had expired at the end of the regular season; what matters is that I didn’t confirm whether or not that was the case. Now, that oversight has further jeopardized my relationship with my team and our fans, my reputation, and maybe even my career.
Mr. WEO Posted January 29, 2015 Posted January 29, 2015 It depends on what the real story is. Personally, if the guy is not known to have a drinking problem, and it's not illegal, and he is made to agree to not drink at all during the season in order for him to be re-instated, then they should just randomly check him. They shouldn't try to nail him waiting in Vegas. That's my personal viewpoint. I have no sympathy or love for Josh Gordon. I'm only going by what I think is fair. I said before this letter came out that it was stupid and unfair for the league to tell him he couldn't have a drink, or a few. It's not illegal. There is no indication he had a drinking problem. I don;t know the real terms of the agreement. His argument, which is entirely believable to me, that he didn't think he could be tested at any time. That the drinking ban ended when the season ended. It was a requirement for his reinstatement and his suspension to be dropped by a couple games. Maybe that was just an excuse. Maybe not. It's believable both ways. He obviously agreed to abstain from alcohol beyond the end of the season. Is it fair that he break the conditions of his agreement as long as he doesn't get caught? And it's unfair when he does get caught? What is the intent of the agreement if he can abuse substances between "random" tests?
Kelly the Dog Posted January 29, 2015 Posted January 29, 2015 I don’t care if it was a sip of wine at church, its stupid. He has had what feels like a million chances now. His stupidity is a slap in everyone’s face, especially fans of the Browns who have to put up with moron after moron after moron. What would you give up to make millions of dollars and play football for a living? Because I know I would probably have no problem never drinking a glass of wine until after I retire if I'm not addicted. He has - what - 5-10 years to maximize his NFL career? He has the rest of his life to drink/smoke as much as he wants. The NFL deserves a lot of crap for a lot of different reasons but this isn’t one of them in my opinion. The rules are too strict? The rules are the rules. JG isn’t able to follow them for more than a month at a time. I'm a Browns fan and I don't want him back on my team, it’s obvious to many that he doesn’t give a crap about the team. Blaming the NFL for JG's suspension is actually enabling JG and probably further inhibiting his ability to accept the help being offered to him. Neither he nor I blamed the NFL for his suspension. He blamed himself a dozen times in that letter, I blamed him. I think he was stupid. That doesn't also mean there were other elements to consider. He obviously agreed to abstain from alcohol beyond the end of the season. Is it fair that he break the conditions of his agreement as long as he doesn't get caught? And it's unfair when he does get caught? What is the intent of the agreement if he can abuse substances between "random" tests? Why is that obvious. He said that wasn't the case. He may be lying, I don't know. IIRC the players don't get tested in the offseason.
Malazan Posted January 29, 2015 Posted January 29, 2015 I think it is a polarizing topic. Natural to have a lot of dissension because it extends outside the sport and into life. I believe that is exactly what I said
Cleveland Rocks? Posted January 29, 2015 Posted January 29, 2015 Neither he nor I blamed the NFL for his suspension. He blamed himself a dozen times in that letter, I blamed him. I think he was stupid. That doesn't also mean there were other elements to consider. Why is that obvious. He said that wasn't the case. He may be lying, I don't know. IIRC the players don't get tested in the offseason. They do, even the ones who aren't in the substance abuse program. Those who aren't in the program are still tested 2-3 times in the offseason but alcohol is not considered an banned substance if they haven't had prior issues like a DUI and had it put into their treatment plan.
FireChan Posted January 29, 2015 Posted January 29, 2015 Neither he nor I blamed the NFL for his suspension. He blamed himself a dozen times in that letter, I blamed him. I think he was stupid. That doesn't also mean there were other elements to consider. Why is that obvious. He said that wasn't the case. He may be lying, I don't know. IIRC the players don't get tested in the offseason. How did Dareus get caught again? He explicitly said he should have done that in his letter, even though according to him, the league said he had to abstain from the drinking for the rest of the season only. According to him, that's what he thought, not necessarily what he was told. And yes, he should have. That's exactly what he should've done after, what is this the fourth or fifth time? What's that old saying? Fool me five times...
Cleveland Rocks? Posted January 29, 2015 Posted January 29, 2015 No? NO??? Some people wouldn't want him on the team?? That's laughable. I'm guessing whoever feels that way owns a Chris Hogan jersey and/or is part of his extended family. The letter was nicely written. I also hate that cliche of "I'm worried about him" by people on tv regarding others they don't even know. It's so phony. You guys don't even need him. This reflects what most Browns fans think about the letter -- http://www.cleveland.com/budshaw/index.ssf/2015/01/cleveland_browns_josh_gordon_s.html
Kelly the Dog Posted January 29, 2015 Posted January 29, 2015 How did Dareus get caught again? According to him, that's what he thought, not necessarily what he was told. And yes, he should have. That's exactly what he should've done after, what is this the fourth or fifth time? What's that old saying? Fool me five times... He put that specific sentence in bold, for emphasis. There is no question that is what he believes he was told, that it was only during the season. Again, he could be lying, I don't know. I think he was lying about smoking dope in the car, so I wouldn't put it past him of course. His explanation of the drinking is very plausible though. People can be stupid AND be mistreated. Dareus was arrested, that's why.
negativo Posted January 29, 2015 Posted January 29, 2015 You guys don't even need him. This reflects what most Browns fans think about the letter -- http://www.cleveland.com/budshaw/index.ssf/2015/01/cleveland_browns_josh_gordon_s.html It reflects how I think, too.
Kelly the Dog Posted January 29, 2015 Posted January 29, 2015 They do, even the ones who aren't in the substance abuse program. Those who aren't in the program are still tested 2-3 times in the offseason but alcohol is not considered an banned substance if they haven't had prior issues like a DUI and had it put into their treatment plan. Yep, you're right, they do. It was added to his as a condition to get his suspension reduced, because of the new rules. I agree he is a moron for not checking explicitly or knowing the rules as it specifically applies to his case. I don't necessarily assume the NFL made it abundantly clear to him, and as I stated before, my personal bias and belief is that they shouldn't anyway, for a couple drinks. But he was stupid, no doubt, and he admits a dozen times he was stupid.
Rob's House Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 I think It's ridiculous that someone's livelihood can be taken away for drinking beer and smoking pot. I'm not sure why the league gives a ****; not sure why some of you do either.
bobobonators Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 Kinda hard for me to feel sorry for this guy, though somehow part of me still kinda does. I think It's ridiculous that someone's livelihood can be taken away for drinking beer and smoking pot. I'm not sure why the league gives a ****; not sure why some of you do either. Thats life.
FireChan Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 I think It's ridiculous that someone's livelihood can be taken away for drinking beer and smoking pot. I'm not sure why the league gives a ****; not sure why some of you do either. The league gives a **** because it's bad for business to have millionaires who represent their company driving around drunk and high.
Kelly the Dog Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 The league gives a **** because it's bad for business to have millionaires who represent their company driving around drunk and high. Then you suspend them if they are caught. Or if they are doing something illegal. Like any other citizen. It's not illegal to have a few drinks. It's not wrong, it's not bad for the league, it's none of their business even if the guy got a DUI. Especially in the off season. If they are doing something wrong, like driving drunk, then you punish them.
FireChan Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 (edited) Then you suspend them if they are caught. Or if they are doing something illegal. Like any other citizen. It's not illegal to have a few drinks. It's not wrong, it's not bad for the league, it's none of their business even if the guy got a DUI. Especially in the off season. If they are doing something wrong, like driving drunk, then you punish them. It's bad for the league if they get DUI's. It's bad for the league if they get caught doing something illegal. It's bad for the league if their players are perpetuating the stereotype that football players are millionaire criminals or addicts. It's their business because their players are famous because of their business. Edited January 30, 2015 by FireChan
Rob's House Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 (edited) Thats life.So is getting cancer. The league gives a **** because it's bad for business to have millionaires who represent their company driving around drunk and high.So suspend them for activity that tarnished the league's image. What does that have to do with testing them for non-performance enhancing drugs? Edited January 30, 2015 by Rob's House
Kelly the Dog Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 So is getting cancer. So suspend them for activity that tarnished the league's image. What does that have to do with testing them for non-performance enhancing drugs? That's what I think. For a league so obsessed with their image, they sure make a lot of ridiculous rules and mistakes. That said, they're so successful, it's hard to argue they don't know what they're doing to help themselves, regardless of how much we B word and moan.
FireChan Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 So is getting cancer. So suspend them for activity that tarnished the league's image. What does that have to do with testing them for non-performance enhancing drugs? Because they've already gotten in trouble for those activities, and they want to deter the same mistake happening again.
Recommended Posts