Skip to content

NFL To Reduce Pot Discipline

The Browns Board
92 27 3.4k
  • A source said.... This is not a done deal as the OP headline seems to indicate. I doubt he even read the article.

    @diehardbrownsfan said:

    A source said.... This is not a done deal as the OP headline seems to indicate. I doubt he even read the article.

    1) eat shit

    2) it is just a matter of time

  • Unlikely to help out Gordon, since he committed his infractions with the old punishment still in place he should be penalised according to that. But then, the NFL is its own beast, and Goodell tends to make it up as he goes along, so who knows.

    @gftchris said:

    Unlikely to help out Gordon, since he committed his infractions with the old punishment still in place he should be penalised according to that. But then, the NFL is its own beast, and Goodell tends to make it up as he goes along, so who knows.

    I saw that some of the states where weed is now legal are reducing some of the sentences of those that got busted under the old weed laws. So maybe that could happen here.

  • gordonsmoke_zps370dbf86.png

  • @gftchris said:

    Unlikely to help out Gordon, since he committed his infractions with the old punishment still in place he should be penalised according to that. But then, the NFL is its own beast, and Goodell tends to make it up as he goes along, so who knows.

    I saw that some of the states where weed is now legal are reducing some of the sentences of those that got busted under the old weed laws. So maybe that could happen here.

    @mld-woody said:

    I saw that some of the states where weed is now legal are reducing some of the sentences of those that got busted under the old weed laws. So maybe that could happen here.

    But that still doesn't affect the Browns in any way, or the Denver Broncos for that matter. Some who was charged with buying or posessing weed in Washington or Colorado that are still serving time could see reduced sentences, but that has not affect on any company that has an anti drug policy. Any company in Denver or Colorado can still make it so it you test positive, you can be fired right on the spot and there is nothing the state can do about it. Not to mention the NFL is not a Washington or Colorado company.

  • I'm saying if the NFL reduced their pot discipline and reduced the penalty maybe those that got hit under the old sanctions would catch a break

  • I'm saying if the NFL reduced their pot discipline and reduced the penalty maybe those that got hit under the old sanctions would catch a break

    @mld-woody said:

    I'm saying if the NFL reduced their pot discipline and reduced the penalty maybe those that got hit under the old sanctions would catch a break

    Oh ok. I agree to an extent. I think if punishment has already been given they won't hut I think if there are failed tests from before any change and an appeal happens after the change they would punish them based on the new rules.

  • it'd be considered 'grandfathered in' wouldn't it?

    those who want to catch a break because they were there and don't have to pay up to the new standard (like rent control) always use the grandfather clause. so in this case i would think even if the NFL does change it's policy (which i don't see happening anytime soon) gordon would still get the full fist fuck from the NFL.

    with no lubrication this time.

  • Well I haven't heard an official punishment being handed down yet. If they make this change before the official punishment is handed down I could see Gordon being subjected to the new punishments.

    I don't think it's likely but that's what I'm hoping for.

    The fact that this information was leaked against protocol could result in some leniency as well.

    Even more not likely but plausible.

    And if we want to go the conspiracy theory route, it would more than likely be in the NFL's best interest to have their new potential golden boy (JF) have his most dynamic weapon available when he hits the field, say after the bye week?

    Incredibly unlikely but if it does happen you guys can start calling me Nostrodomus.

  • it'd be considered 'grandfathered in' wouldn't it?

    those who want to catch a break because they were there and don't have to pay up to the new standard (like rent control) always use the grandfather clause. so in this case i would think even if the NFL does change it's policy (which i don't see happening anytime soon) gordon would still get the full fist fuck from the NFL.

    with no lubrication this time.

    @miktoxic said:

    it'd be considered 'grandfathered in' wouldn't it?

    those who want to catch a break because they were there and don't have to pay up to the new standard (like rent control) always use the grandfather clause. so in this case i would think even if the NFL does change it's policy (which i don't see happening anytime soon) gordon would still get the full fist fuck from the NFL.

    with no lubrication this time.

    I think this ultimately should and will help Josh. Grandfathering is a mechanism that generally applies to maintaining a benefit that no longer exists. It doesn't exist to apply a punishment that no one thinks of as being fair. There is a big difference between the two.

    If the NFL is reviewing its policy because the punishments are, disproportionate, overly harsh and out of touch with modern reality, there would be a strong argument that it is unjust to apply the old penalty simply because an offense was committed under the old rules. The NFL is basically admitting that the old rules were unfair.

  • Good.

  • If not......

    ......Nostradumbass!

    🙂

    WSS

  • If not......

    ......Nostradumbass!

    🙂

    WSS

    @westside-steve said:

    If not......

    ......Nostradumbass!

    🙂

    WSS

    I guess it's better then just plain ole dumbass.

  • @westside-steve said:

    If not......

    ......Nostradumbass!

    🙂

    WSS

    I guess it's better then just plain ole dumbass.

    @taco918 said:

    I guess it's better then just plain ole dumbass.

    Speech to text?

    WSS

  • @taco918 said:

    I guess it's better then just plain ole dumbass.

    Speech to text?

    WSS

    @westside-steve said:

    Speech to text?

    WSS

    Nope. I thought about putting a space between the dumb and ass but that's about it.

  • @westside-steve said:

    Speech to text?

    WSS

    Nope. I thought about putting a space between the dumb and ass but that's about it.

    @taco918 said:

    Nope. I thought about putting a space between the dumb and ass but that's about it.

    No; even more minor..

    Then for than...

    WSS

  • @taco918 said:

    Nope. I thought about putting a space between the dumb and ass but that's about it.

    No; even more minor..

    Then for than...

    WSS

    @westside-steve said:

    No; even more minor..

    Then for than...

    WSS

    Eh tomato, tomato.

  • @miktoxic said:

    it'd be considered 'grandfathered in' wouldn't it?

    those who want to catch a break because they were there and don't have to pay up to the new standard (like rent control) always use the grandfather clause. so in this case i would think even if the NFL does change it's policy (which i don't see happening anytime soon) gordon would still get the full fist fuck from the NFL.

    with no lubrication this time.

    I think this ultimately should and will help Josh. Grandfathering is a mechanism that generally applies to maintaining a benefit that no longer exists. It doesn't exist to apply a punishment that no one thinks of as being fair. There is a big difference between the two.

    If the NFL is reviewing its policy because the punishments are, disproportionate, overly harsh and out of touch with modern reality, there would be a strong argument that it is unjust to apply the old penalty simply because an offense was committed under the old rules. The NFL is basically admitting that the old rules were unfair.

    @hish747 said:

    I think this ultimately should and will help Josh. Grandfathering is a mechanism that generally applies to maintaining a benefit that no longer exists. It doesn't exist to apply a punishment that no one thinks of as being fair. There is a big difference between the two.

    If the NFL is reviewing its policy because the punishments are, disproportionate, overly harsh and out of touch with modern reality, there would be a strong argument that it is unjust to apply the old penalty simply because an offense was committed under the old rules. The NFL is basically admitting that the old rules were unfair.

    Agreed. Like when the death penalty was removed in the State of California sometime in the 70's (but reinstated later I believe), which is why Charles Mansion is still with us today.

  • A source said.... This is not a done deal as the OP headline seems to indicate. I doubt he even read the article.

    @diehardbrownsfan said:

    A source said.... This is not a done deal as the OP headline seems to indicate.

    Note: Also did not read ESPN.go article since that site imbeds tracking beyond the usual cookies most sites use. Takes a virus sweep to remove ESPN.go tracking...

    Yup... all balled up in a package of revised testing negotiations between NFL and NFLPA. Big sticking point I've heard of is NFLPA balking at HGH related changes.

    In addition to changing the THC action level to eliminate passive exposure positives as it's been reported Josh is claiming, there also seems to be some discussion of a medical exemption for prescribed cannabis. Where legalization/ decriminalization is in its infancy, medical marijuana is well, and more widely, established. There are currently 21 states plus DC where medical marijuana is legal.

    @hish747 said:

    I think this ultimately should and will help Josh. Grandfathering is a mechanism that generally applies to maintaining a benefit that no longer exists. It doesn't exist to apply a punishment that no one thinks of as being fair. There is a big difference between the two.

    Agree...

  • According to Mike Florio yesterday on DP show, "everything is negotiable" when it comes to Josh Gordon's punishment should this new policy pass. It sounded like him being gone the whole year is far from a done deal, especially if the potency of his test falls below what the new testing threshold would deem a positive sample.

  • @diehardbrownsfan said:

    A source said.... This is not a done deal as the OP headline seems to indicate.

    Note: Also did not read ESPN.go article since that site imbeds tracking beyond the usual cookies most sites use. Takes a virus sweep to remove ESPN.go tracking...

    Yup... all balled up in a package of revised testing negotiations between NFL and NFLPA. Big sticking point I've heard of is NFLPA balking at HGH related changes.

    In addition to changing the THC action level to eliminate passive exposure positives as it's been reported Josh is claiming, there also seems to be some discussion of a medical exemption for prescribed cannabis. Where legalization/ decriminalization is in its infancy, medical marijuana is well, and more widely, established. There are currently 21 states plus DC where medical marijuana is legal.

    @hish747 said:

    I think this ultimately should and will help Josh. Grandfathering is a mechanism that generally applies to maintaining a benefit that no longer exists. It doesn't exist to apply a punishment that no one thinks of as being fair. There is a big difference between the two.

    Agree...

    @tour2ma said:

    Note: Also did not read ESPN.go article since that site imbeds tracking beyond the usual cookies most sites use. Takes a virus sweep to remove ESPN.go tracking...

    I use betterprivacy an addon for firefox... I'm sure other browers have the same or similar versions... it removes all lso supercookies when you close out your browser.