Apparently no.BR1986FB;1648324 wrote:Mort tweeted that Gordon is exploring the option of playing out the year in the Canadian Football Legue? Is this even possible?
@AdamSchefter: Browns official to @PatMcManamon on Josh Gordon to CFL: "He can’t per his nfl contract…and you can say a source says he can’t…"
I think the reason it took so long was that the league may have been looking for an "out" as to how to reduce the suspension. Explosive players like Gordon are good for the league. As you mentioned, I think the league didn't have a choice but to slap the full year on him.Dr Winston O'Boogie;1648333 wrote:Why it took the league so long to issue its ruling, I have no idea.
Agreed. It was the actual appeal and the ruling by an arbitrator that took so long.Dr Winston O'Boogie;1648333 wrote:The rule affecting Gordon is a rule that was made in bargaining unit negotiations with the NFLPA. The NFL didn't really have any choice to make - the whole case is black and white. Why it took the league so long to issue its ruling, I have no idea. But Gordon and the Browns cannot act surprised. They should have assumed all along that the suspension would be for the full year.
The issue has nothing to do with the severity of "this" crime versus "that" crime. Drug use penalties were negotiated and agreed to by the players.
I used to work for a company where tobacco use was grounds for termination, even though tobacco is legal. I thought the rule was stupid myself and I no longer work at the company in part because I don't want to work for an employer with rules like that. But while I was there, I knew that if I smoked a cigar on the golf course on a Sunday afternoon and then was randomly tested the next day at work, I faced sanctions. My working there was my tacit agreement to abide by that rule. If Gordon wants to play in the NFL, he must look at this way.
On a personal level, I hope Gordon gets the help he needs. Abuse/addiction is nothing to mess with and will ruin his life if he doesn't get a handle on it.
They didn't. It was always going to have to be all or nothing based on the way the CBA is written. People were floating 4-8 games but it was never a possibility. The Browns knew that the entire time, as did Gordon.I think the league didn't have a choice but to slap the full year on him.
Your analogy is way off.Commander of Awesome;1648329 wrote:BR, I understand that being around ppl taking pot is up to gordon etc... However the NFL's threshold is a joke. The Olympics has a 5x times higher limit than what Gordon tested at, and his levels are right in line with walking by a guy who was lighting up.
Gordon needs to be accountable for his actions, sure, but this is beyond fucked. This is some hardcore punishment. Best example I can think of is cutting off someone's hand for standing next to a guy stealing.
Goddell and the arbitrator can both GFT for this whole ordeal.
Yep. If I was Gordon I'd be more pissed at the nflpa than Goodell.Con_Alma;1648309 wrote:In addition, these "beyond awful" rules were agreed to by the players association quite some time ago.
Good point--it seems like they're the forgotten entity here.hangonsloopy;1648402 wrote:Yep. If I was Gordon I'd be more pissed at the nflpa than Goodell.
I doubt it.Dr. KnOiTaLL;1648423 wrote:You guys think there's any chance Gordon sues the NFL, in which case he would be allowed to play? I know a couple weeks ago, an attorney posted a long post about legal proceedings in a scenario where Gordon might have a shot. Do you think this is realistic or is the case closed period?
No bc Breowns.Dr. KnOiTaLL;1648423 wrote:You guys think there's any chance Gordon sues the NFL, in which case he would be allowed to play? I know a couple weeks ago, an attorney posted a long post about legal proceedings in a scenario where Gordon might have a shot. Do you think this is realistic or is the case closed period?
Diff type of situation.Commander of Awesome;1648427 wrote:No bc Breowns.
If he were a vikings player, ala Star Caps, then yes. SMH fuck Goddell. Scumbag POS
Not me. I have no issue with him being suspended, as he's the fuckup, but Rice should've gotten equal, or worse, punishment. Sends a horrible message.thavoice;1648435 wrote: but you browns fans can blame everyone and anything else other than the true person at fault...and that is Gordon himself.
BR1986FB;1648436 wrote:Not me. I have no issue with him being suspended, as he's the fuckup, but Rice should've gotten equal, or worse, punishment. Sends a horrible message.
I cannot disagree. Rice shoulda got more, and appears now things have changed with the new rules in place.BR1986FB;1648436 wrote:Not me. I have no issue with him being suspended, as he's the fuckup, but Rice should've gotten equal, or worse, punishment. Sends a horrible message.
