Josh Gordon Troubles
-
If this were Gordons first offense there would be a sh.it storm. Its his what 4th now? Obviously that's a pattern and with 4 "minor" violations the hammer is going to come down. Especially when you consider he was already in hot water and he got flagged again. If I knew I was under a microscope there is absolutely no way I'd even be around people smoking it. I wouldn't be in the same room, hell I wouldnt be in the same building. Its that level of both arrogance and ignorance that is going to get Gordon suspended for 16.
Here's the deal guy- a little personal info on me- I've done medical laboratory work, and been around that type of instrumentation for a long, long time. I won't argue that if you go by the very strict interpretation of the drug policy, Gordon will get suspended for a year.
However- I make my living interpreting laboratory test results. If Gordon had pissed a 100, it would be bye-bye, no question. Here's some stuff his defense team is going to bring up. Things like accuracy, precision, and reproducibility. Notice the NFLPA agreement says the second sample is "limits of detectability"? I don't know what that would be for this particular method, but you can sure as hell bet his lawyer does. That has to be getting mighty close to a (crazy low by Olympic drug standards) positive. Notice the difference between the two tests? That can bring into question the reproducibility, precision, and accuracy- the two samples should have been near identical- within tenths- and they're not. So again, I'm sure Mr Hotshot lawyer has thoroughly researched that sort of stuff. If the precision, reproducibility & accuracy at that level are ± 10% you do the math what 16 - 10% = .
Same thinking as a DUI lawyer that gets a 0.81 thrown out on instrument error. Not saying it will happen, but the possibility is there. My hope is the suspension does get tossed. and then Goodell suspends him for a couple of games for hanging out with dopers. Fair enough?
Things like accuracy, precision, and reproducibility.
good point on this ^^.
and they are not just different but by a measurable margin. the fact that the "B" is 13.6 ng as opposed to say 14.9 ng seems likely to help better his chances as well.
but i have a feeling they will still be biased by the idea he is trying to beat the system. i know i am. and if he is a caregiver for his Mom who has glaucoma and chronically smokes chronic either hire that job out, get her a vape, do SOMETHING else. it's ridiculous to me to even suggest anyway...cuz i for one am failry convinced it wasn't 2nd hand smoke. but that's just me.
his boy is obviously a chronic chronic smoker>chron chron>>chron squared>>kron to the 2nd...
potheads and non-potheads mix, but they don't hang out daily like those two. seems like a bad influence and around every time something happens.
-
Lol... u use marijuana? ... enough said
I do on occasion but my father has been battling stage iv colon cancer and his vape has been an invaluable tool in his recovery process for both pain and his upset stomach. What you are attempting to argue is like attempting to argue that burger king sells big macs. Everyone knows they sell the damn whopper just like EVERYONE knows marijuana blocks pain receptors.
I do on occasion but my father has been battling stage iv colon cancer and his vape has been an invaluable tool in his recovery process for both pain and his upset stomach. What you are attempting to argue is like attempting to argue that burger king sells big macs. Everyone knows they sell the damn whopper just like EVERYONE knows marijuana blocks pain receptors.
Your dad wants to smoke pot b/c it helps with cancer symptoms... fine. I never said THC doesn't block pain nor did I say it doesn't have any benefits for people in your dad's shoes. I said it has bad side effects, especially long-term use. You want to keep arguing that, I'll keep pointing to the fact that you use marijuana, so I'm assuming you enjoy it, so I'm assuming you have "research bias" that is pro-marijuana. I am unbiased. Talk to me when you've worked with literally 3,000+ drug addicts/abusers, and then tell me marijuana doesn't have side effects. Not to mention, I used marijuana damn-near everyday for 6 years of my life before I straghtened myself out. I think I have an idea of what I'm talking about...
And please, don't use your dad's illness to justify your recreational pot use... that's just classless... I wish him all the best...
#Justsayin' -
I think being around 3,000 + "addicts" would make you biased. Ive smoked weed for 13 years and Ive never once felt ill or shaky when I missed a few days. I smoke it because it relaxes me, and everything is better high. Food, movies, music, sex, and being bored are examples. Ive been around plenty of daily smokers, and I feel confident in saying Ive never met a marijuana addict. The problems with marijuana come in when you mix it, or smoke it all day every day.
-
pot is not addictive, period.
side effects? sure. there are side effects from everything done in life. married. divorced. side effect? a bitter old bitch.
-
If this were Gordons first offense there would be a sh.it storm. Its his what 4th now? Obviously that's a pattern and with 4 "minor" violations the hammer is going to come down. Especially when you consider he was already in hot water and he got flagged again. If I knew I was under a microscope there is absolutely no way I'd even be around people smoking it. I wouldn't be in the same room, hell I wouldnt be in the same building. Its that level of both arrogance and ignorance that is going to get Gordon suspended for 16.
Here's the deal guy- a little personal info on me- I've done medical laboratory work, and been around that type of instrumentation for a long, long time. I won't argue that if you go by the very strict interpretation of the drug policy, Gordon will get suspended for a year.
However- I make my living interpreting laboratory test results. If Gordon had pissed a 100, it would be bye-bye, no question. Here's some stuff his defense team is going to bring up. Things like accuracy, precision, and reproducibility. Notice the NFLPA agreement says the second sample is "limits of detectability"? I don't know what that would be for this particular method, but you can sure as hell bet his lawyer does. That has to be getting mighty close to a (crazy low by Olympic drug standards) positive. Notice the difference between the two tests? That can bring into question the reproducibility, precision, and accuracy- the two samples should have been near identical- within tenths- and they're not. So again, I'm sure Mr Hotshot lawyer has thoroughly researched that sort of stuff. If the precision, reproducibility & accuracy at that level are ± 10% you do the math what 16 - 10% = .
Same thinking as a DUI lawyer that gets a 0.81 thrown out on instrument error. Not saying it will happen, but the possibility is there. My hope is the suspension does get tossed. and then Goodell suspends him for a couple of games for hanging out with dopers. Fair enough?
Here's the deal guy- a little personal info on me- I've done medical laboratory work, and been around that type of instrumentation for a long, long time. I won't argue that if you go by the very strict interpretation of the drug policy, Gordon will get suspended for a year.
However- I make my living interpreting laboratory test results. If Gordon had pissed a 100, it would be bye-bye, no question. Here's some stuff his defense team is going to bring up. Things like accuracy, precision, and reproducibility. Notice the NFLPA agreement says the second sample is "limits of detectability"? I don't know what that would be for this particular method, but you can sure as hell bet his lawyer does. That has to be getting mighty close to a (crazy low by Olympic drug standards) positive. Notice the difference between the two tests? That can bring into question the reproducibility, precision, and accuracy- the two samples should have been near identical- within tenths- and they're not. So again, I'm sure Mr Hotshot lawyer has thoroughly researched that sort of stuff. If the precision, reproducibility & accuracy at that level are ± 10% you do the math what 16 - 10% = .
Same thinking as a DUI lawyer that gets a 0.81 thrown out on instrument error. Not saying it will happen, but the possibility is there. My hope is the suspension does get tossed. and then Goodell suspends him for a couple of games for hanging out with dopers. Fair enough?
I don't disagree but he's beyond his three strikes and if it were me after my first I'm doing everything in my power to avoid a second. Gordon grabbed a third and then grabbed a fourth whether it was a contact high or not. Gordon shouldn't have been around it at all and because he was it displays were his head isn't and that clearly isn't with a brown helmet on his head. He needs a life evsluation and even as a browns fan I'd want him to grab a 16 game in the hopes of keeping him on the straight and narrow long term. Give him a couple games and it will happen again.
AKA SNATCH98 or Rorbotron. The boards glorious admins decided to get cute and change my name to "homotron" Classy group of people. (Lost a bet with Columbus king and got banned for a month) -
I do on occasion but my father has been battling stage iv colon cancer and his vape has been an invaluable tool in his recovery process for both pain and his upset stomach. What you are attempting to argue is like attempting to argue that burger king sells big macs. Everyone knows they sell the damn whopper just like EVERYONE knows marijuana blocks pain receptors.
Your dad wants to smoke pot b/c it helps with cancer symptoms... fine. I never said THC doesn't block pain nor did I say it doesn't have any benefits for people in your dad's shoes. I said it has bad side effects, especially long-term use. You want to keep arguing that, I'll keep pointing to the fact that you use marijuana, so I'm assuming you enjoy it, so I'm assuming you have "research bias" that is pro-marijuana. I am unbiased. Talk to me when you've worked with literally 3,000+ drug addicts/abusers, and then tell me marijuana doesn't have side effects. Not to mention, I used marijuana damn-near everyday for 6 years of my life before I straghtened myself out. I think I have an idea of what I'm talking about...
And please, don't use your dad's illness to justify your recreational pot use... that's just classless... I wish him all the best...
Your dad wants to smoke pot b/c it helps with cancer symptoms... fine. I never said THC doesn't block pain nor did I say it doesn't have any benefits for people in your dad's shoes. I said it has bad side effects, especially long-term use. You want to keep arguing that, I'll keep pointing to the fact that you use marijuana, so I'm assuming you enjoy it, so I'm assuming you have "research bias" that is pro-marijuana. I am unbiased. Talk to me when you've worked with literally 3,000+ drug addicts/abusers, and then tell me marijuana doesn't have side effects. Not to mention, I used marijuana damn-near everyday for 6 years of my life before I straghtened myself out. I think I have an idea of what I'm talking about...
And please, don't use your dad's illness to justify your recreational pot use... that's just classless... I wish him all the best...
Pot is harmless if you aren't over doing it. I may smoke once or twice a month and at no point even disclosed my recreational use. Just like I drink a beer a couple times a month. I do either to take an edge off. I don't enjoy being impaired to the point of visible impairment.
-
A comment from a lab tech.
I think GORDON WILL WIN HIS APPEAL.... this is why-- Gordon's drug test was a SPLIT test. This means that the urine was collected into one cup and then poured off into 2 separate vials. This is done for the donor's protection in case they want to call for a re-test. "Bottle A" was tested and came back above cut-off. At that point, I'm sure the results were protested, so they went ahead and processed "Bottle B" and saw that it was below cut-off. Drug testing in the workplace and Department Of Transportation (DOT drug testing, which is the highest regulated in our nation) says that if Bottle B comes back below the cutoff, then the sample is deemed NEGATIVE even if the first bottle (Bottle A) was positive.
For this reason, I believe Gordon will win his appeal. It wasn't because the 2 bottles had 2 different levels as stated in the article. In fact, the article makes it sound like the reason that was even brought up was to say that something was tampered with and bottles were switched around. Fact is, a sample done on a split collection can definitely show 2 different readings. I confirmed this with my lab manager who has been in the forensic drug testing field for 20+ years.
I've been a Medical Technologist for a long time- I've never done Forensic Toxicology, but I know plenty about the instrumentation used in it. His lawyers should be asking what's the accuracy and reproducibility at those levels? If it was the same sample and was split- they should be damn close- not almost 2 ng different. To my mind- that's enough to toss the case out.
Typically 250+ if a person used in the last 24 hours. 500+ if a person is a chronic user or used a large amount. In my professional opinion, a test at 16 is either "trace" amounts from a person who hasnt used since 30+ days ago, or second hand smoke inhaled within the past 24 hours.
The levels are never exact science because all individuals bodies are different.
As far as poppy seeds, yes they would produce a positive test... for opiates... not thc... Gotta get your drugs straight...
Hmmm, if Josh was tooling around in his car with his pals and they were toking up a storm for an hour- I can certainly buy his second hand smoke argument. He needs to stay away- far away from those guys. I think having passed 50+ tests, and voluntarily checking into rehab will help his case.
Plus if they give Gordon a year for a level that truck drivers, airline pilots, and Olympic athletes would pass- and Ray Rice gets two games for cold-cocking his fiancee, there's going to be a shit storm.
His lawyers should be asking what's the accuracy and reproducibility at those levels? If it was the same sample and was split- they should be damn close- not almost 2 ng different. To my mind- that's enough to toss the case out.
Yup... and a QC Lab was under me in a past life... What caught my attention is not so much the absolute difference in results from a split sample as it is the difference's percentage.
As I posted earlier, were both samples even run by the same method? Most drug programs I know of use different methods. If this is the case in the NFL program then I doubt the primarily has the precision of the secondary. Also could raise questions of the limit of quantification is of the tests used.
If this were Gordons first offense there would be a sh.it storm.
If it were his first, then under the policy, we would not have heard about it.
If I'm not mistaken cold medicine that has pseudoephedrine in it could come up positive for speed. They new that back in the 80's.
Not sure about that, but it is an ingredient in the long-lasting decongestants that you now have to show ID to purchase because pseudo is a raw material for cooking meth.
Lol why not link an article that isn't full of a bunch of opinionated bs. I stopped reading the minute I read gateway drug.
For some people air is a gateway drug...
-
I think being around 3,000 + "addicts" would make you biased. Ive smoked weed for 13 years and Ive never once felt ill or shaky when I missed a few days. I smoke it because it relaxes me, and everything is better high. Food, movies, music, sex, and being bored are examples. Ive been around plenty of daily smokers, and I feel confident in saying Ive never met a marijuana addict. The problems with marijuana come in when you mix it, or smoke it all day every day.
XxDaBuckeyexX said:
I smoke it because it relaxes me, and everything is better high. Food, movies, music, sex, and being bored are examples.
lol... Never thought about there being varying degrees of being bored...
pot is not addictive, period.
Physically? No. Psychologically? Well...
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
-
I think being around 3,000 + "addicts" would make you biased. Ive smoked weed for 13 years and Ive never once felt ill or shaky when I missed a few days. I smoke it because it relaxes me, and everything is better high. Food, movies, music, sex, and being bored are examples. Ive been around plenty of daily smokers, and I feel confident in saying Ive never met a marijuana addict. The problems with marijuana come in when you mix it, or smoke it all day every day.
XxDaBuckeyexX said:
I think being around 3,000 + "addicts" would make you biased. Ive smoked weed for 13 years and Ive never once felt ill or shaky when I missed a few days. I smoke it because it relaxes me, and everything is better high. Food, movies, music, sex, and being bored are examples. Ive been around plenty of daily smokers, and I feel confident in saying Ive never met a marijuana addict. The problems with marijuana come in when you mix it, or smoke it all day every day.
I used to think that it and other things made everything better too. Once I quit it I found that to be untrue. For me everything is better without it. To each their own as long as it doesn't hurt others or themselves.
-
I haven't smoked it in decades. I never liked the buzz, it made me tired dull and hungry. In my experience guys that smoke a lot of pot seem stupid to me. I guess it's different for different people but I have no doubt that you can develop a dependency whether you get the shakes or not.
Anyway just because of the very reasonable doubt I'd say the right thing to do is just toss the case.
WSS
-
-
XxDaBuckeyexX said:
I think being around 3,000 + "addicts" would make you biased. Ive smoked weed for 13 years and Ive never once felt ill or shaky when I missed a few days. I smoke it because it relaxes me, and everything is better high. Food, movies, music, sex, and being bored are examples. Ive been around plenty of daily smokers, and I feel confident in saying Ive never met a marijuana addict. The problems with marijuana come in when you mix it, or smoke it all day every day.
I used to think that it and other things made everything better too. Once I quit it I found that to be untrue. For me everything is better without it. To each their own as long as it doesn't hurt others or themselves.
Without a doubt it makes certain things more enjoyable, if you tell yourself different, eat some taco bell, then get high and eat taco bell. Case closed.I used to think that it and other things made everything better too. Once I quit it I found that to be untrue. For me everything is better without it. To each their own as long as it doesn't hurt others or themselves.
-
Give Josh Gordon a break is all I'm saying. He's making the effort. Ricky Williams' he is not. Josh cares, maybe too much for his own good in not turning his back on those that are maybe a bad influence. I love Josh, he's a good kid/young man- If you can't see that from him by now... You are blind.
A lot of people have a lot of animosity toward Josh right now because they 'jumped to the proverbial conclusion' in their assessment of Josh Gordon's character and now have to back-track on themselves. Some people just hate to be wrong and will look to blame Josh in some other way.
#FreeJoshGordon and let the man 'be great'. To become Great, One must first overcome obstacles and endeavors, striving to break records whilst at the same time shattering those assumptions of your perceived success. Josh has all the recipes right now to hurdle from one of life's lowest points straight to the top of the NFL's highest peak. That is why this is so important an appeal. A young man's entire life hangs in the balance.
Please, make the right call Goodell. Let Gordon Play.... Let Gordon Play, Let Gordon Play, Let ...
The secret of getting ahead is getting started. The secret of getting started is breaking your complex overwhelming tasks into small manageable tasks, and then starting on the first one. -Mark Twain- "It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog." -Mark Twain- -
Without a doubt it makes certain things more enjoyable, if you tell yourself different, eat some taco bell, then get high and eat taco bell. Case closed.I used to think that it and other things made everything better too. Once I quit it I found that to be untrue. For me everything is better without it. To each their own as long as it doesn't hurt others or themselves.
XxDaBuckeyexX said:
Without a doubt it makes certain things more enjoyable, if you tell yourself different, eat some taco bell, then get high and eat taco bell. Case closed
Man although I try to resist occasionally I do love me a huge bag full of Taco Bell. I however do enjoy it more not high, like I said to each his own.
-
Beating up women gets an NFLer less down time.
-
Here's the deal guy- a little personal info on me- I've done medical laboratory work, and been around that type of instrumentation for a long, long time. I won't argue that if you go by the very strict interpretation of the drug policy, Gordon will get suspended for a year.
However- I make my living interpreting laboratory test results. If Gordon had pissed a 100, it would be bye-bye, no question. Here's some stuff his defense team is going to bring up. Things like accuracy, precision, and reproducibility. Notice the NFLPA agreement says the second sample is "limits of detectability"? I don't know what that would be for this particular method, but you can sure as hell bet his lawyer does. That has to be getting mighty close to a (crazy low by Olympic drug standards) positive. Notice the difference between the two tests? That can bring into question the reproducibility, precision, and accuracy- the two samples should have been near identical- within tenths- and they're not. So again, I'm sure Mr Hotshot lawyer has thoroughly researched that sort of stuff. If the precision, reproducibility & accuracy at that level are ± 10% you do the math what 16 - 10% = .
Same thinking as a DUI lawyer that gets a 0.81 thrown out on instrument error. Not saying it will happen, but the possibility is there. My hope is the suspension does get tossed. and then Goodell suspends him for a couple of games for hanging out with dopers. Fair enough?
I don't disagree but he's beyond his three strikes and if it were me after my first I'm doing everything in my power to avoid a second. Gordon grabbed a third and then grabbed a fourth whether it was a contact high or not. Gordon shouldn't have been around it at all and because he was it displays were his head isn't and that clearly isn't with a brown helmet on his head. He needs a life evsluation and even as a browns fan I'd want him to grab a 16 game in the hopes of keeping him on the straight and narrow long term. Give him a couple games and it will happen again.
I don't disagree but he's beyond his three strikes and if it were me after my first I'm doing everything in my power to avoid a second. Gordon grabbed a third and then grabbed a fourth whether it was a contact high or not. Gordon shouldn't have been around it at all and because he was it displays were his head isn't and that clearly isn't with a brown helmet on his head. He needs a life evsluation and even as a browns fan I'd want him to grab a 16 game in the hopes of keeping him on the straight and narrow long term. Give him a couple games and it will happen again.
V, as a Browns fan, no I don't want Gordon to get the year- and not just because he's one of the top five WRs in the NFL. He gets the year- I'd say the odds are extremely high he winds up like Blackmon. It's not just the weed- it's the reckless driving, bad choice of pals, and the DUI- so if you want to take the stance he's run out of strikes- I can't disagree with you.
But if you smoke the stuff- you have to believe in Gordon's "second hand smoke" defense no? Go sit in a car for an hour or to with your pals toking like there's no tomorrow, and the car is a cloud of smoke- you don't think it's possible anyone in the car wouldn't have a trace (and that's what Gordon registered- a trace) of THC in their system- smoking or not, if they were tested the next day?
Oh, I TOTALLY agree- should the test get tossed, and everyone I talked to in the Lab today thought it should- too close to the artificially low cutoff and discrepant results- Goodell- who's scheduled to meet with Gordon next week needs to tell him. This is your last chance to fly right- don't mess it up.
Give Josh Gordon a break is all I'm saying. He's making the effort. Ricky Williams' he is not. Josh cares, maybe too much for his own good in not turning his back on those that are maybe a bad influence. I love Josh, he's a good kid/young man- If you can't see that from him by now... You are blind.
A lot of people have a lot of animosity toward Josh right now because they 'jumped to the proverbial conclusion' in their assessment of Josh Gordon's character and now have to back-track on themselves. Some people just hate to be wrong and will look to blame Josh in some other way.
#FreeJoshGordon and let the man 'be great'. To become Great, One must first overcome obstacles and endeavors, striving to break records whilst at the same time shattering those assumptions of your perceived success. Josh has all the recipes right now to hurdle from one of life's lowest points straight to the top of the NFL's highest peak. That is why this is so important an appeal. A young man's entire life hangs in the balance.
Please, make the right call Goodell. Let Gordon Play.... Let Gordon Play, Let Gordon Play, Let ...
He's not making enough of an effort PG. How many times did he get busted in college? Then at least two more in the pros. Sure I had a cough. Purple Drank and booze- a losing combination for ya Josh- got a 'scrip for it? No? Tooooo bad. Just ask Joe Haden about alderral. Since Josh got busted for a DUI, I'd say the odds Josh was doing the Drank for medicinal purposes is about zero.
PG- Ray Rice is now Gordon's best pal- at least in the court of public opinion. It will be what it will be.
-
XxDaBuckeyexX said:
I think being around 3,000 + "addicts" would make you biased. Ive smoked weed for 13 years and Ive never once felt ill or shaky when I missed a few days. I smoke it because it relaxes me, and everything is better high. Food, movies, music, sex, and being bored are examples. Ive been around plenty of daily smokers, and I feel confident in saying Ive never met a marijuana addict. The problems with marijuana come in when you mix it, or smoke it all day every day.
I used to think that it and other things made everything better too. Once I quit it I found that to be untrue. For me everything is better without it. To each their own as long as it doesn't hurt others or themselves.
I used to think that it and other things made everything better too. Once I quit it I found that to be untrue. For me everything is better without it. To each their own as long as it doesn't hurt others or themselves.
Agreed
The NFL needs to use Gordon's case to realize they should increase the threshold of a positive THC test and re-think their punishments. If they don't want players around people who smoke weed, they should put that in their policy. It's not in there, so there is possibly no violation of any rule. Gordon has passed 70+ urine screens, and has been doing well since his first punishment and does seem to "want" to improve his life. He seems like a good kid who would benefit from MORE guidance and structure, not a "ban" from probably the only thing in life he can actually be proud of. If they want to take the "hard line" approach that players are responsible for what's in their body, then learn from Blackmon's troubles, and give him a suspension but allow him to remain with the team. Being in that "team" atmosphere will do more good than "banning" him. That rule is written to ENABLE people to FAIL, not to help them. It should read, "If you're in stage 3 of our program and you fail a test... then fu** off, peace!!" I would think an organization like the NFL would give people the support they need to "get better," not punishment and turning your back on them. Actually, I wonder if their policy is even legal... The Medical Board and the Pilot Authority both allow people with drug and alcohol problems an opportunity to get back on their feet, and will even give them back their license after a certain point. As somebody said before, this guy is an entertainer... this level on a drug test should have been addressed with Gordon and his team, in private, and let go. Now it's a public fiasco that is going to end up hurting all parties involved...
-
There's no reason why the NFL should have a different threshold for anything than WADA, to be honest.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login