Josh Gordon
-
POG didn't say that his BAC was one-hundredth of the legal limit (.01 of .08) over the limit, he simply said it was one-hundredth of a percent (.01%) over the limit. What he said was not wrong.
It wasn't .08 + (.01 * .08), it was .08 + .01.
If a subject isn't defined explicitly, it's to be assumed that percentage gain/loss defaults to a scale of 100 - the traditional meaning of the word "percent".
No lie, this was a legitimate day-long argument in a statistics class my freshman year.
That's splitting hairs on a technical definition of percent. I never took statistics BTW. Point is even if you're at 0.081 it's still illegal, though it's a lot easier to argue in court about machine error, if you have a good lawyer.
Well Josh is probably out by now, the saga continues....That's splitting hairs on a technical definition of percent. I never took statistics BTW. Point is even if you're at 0.081 it's still illegal, though it's a lot easier to argue in court about machine error, if you have a good lawyer.
Well Josh is probably out by now, the saga continues....Yes, .08 is the legal Blood Alcohol Content level. But....was that what Gordon had? I didn't think it was anywhere near that. Fact check.
-
That's splitting hairs on a technical definition of percent. I never took statistics BTW. Point is even if you're at 0.081 it's still illegal, though it's a lot easier to argue in court about machine error, if you have a good lawyer.
Well Josh is probably out by now, the saga continues....Yes, .08 is the legal Blood Alcohol Content level. But....was that what Gordon had? I didn't think it was anywhere near that. Fact check.
Yes, .08 is the legal Blood Alcohol Content level. But....was that what Gordon had? I didn't think it was anywhere near that. Fact check.
It was 0.09 Gip. Enough to get you sent to drunk school. Thing is, a lot of people don't think they're over the limit at that level, but they are. From my ER experience, once you get to the 0.15+ level, certainly 0.2+ that's when you ARE a danger on the road, and serious crashes are almost inevitable, unless you're a major alky that's built up a tolerance. I've mentioned in the past the highest BAC I saw from a driver (accident of course) was 0.43 .
According to the book, he should have been unconscious, not driving a car.
-
POG didn't say that his BAC was one-hundredth of the legal limit (.01 of .08) over the limit, he simply said it was one-hundredth of a percent (.01%) over the limit. What he said was not wrong.
It wasn't .08 + (.01 * .08), it was .08 + .01.
If a subject isn't defined explicitly, it's to be assumed that percentage gain/loss defaults to a scale of 100 - the traditional meaning of the word "percent".
No lie, this was a legitimate day-long argument in a statistics class my freshman year.
That's splitting hairs on a technical definition of percent. I never took statistics BTW. Point is even if you're at 0.081 it's still illegal, though it's a lot easier to argue in court about machine error, if you have a good lawyer.
Well Josh is probably out by now, the saga continues.... -
-
Yes, .08 is the legal Blood Alcohol Content level. But....was that what Gordon had? I didn't think it was anywhere near that. Fact check.
It was 0.09 Gip. Enough to get you sent to drunk school. Thing is, a lot of people don't think they're over the limit at that level, but they are. From my ER experience, once you get to the 0.15+ level, certainly 0.2+ that's when you ARE a danger on the road, and serious crashes are almost inevitable, unless you're a major alky that's built up a tolerance. I've mentioned in the past the highest BAC I saw from a driver (accident of course) was 0.43 .
According to the book, he should have been unconscious, not driving a car.
It was 0.09 Gip. Enough to get you sent to drunk school. Thing is, a lot of people don't think they're over the limit at that level, but they are. From my ER experience, once you get to the 0.15+ level, certainly 0.2+ that's when you ARE a danger on the road, and serious crashes are almost inevitable, unless you're a major alky that's built up a tolerance. I've mentioned in the past the highest BAC I saw from a driver (accident of course) was 0.43 .
According to the book, he should have been unconscious, not driving a car.
Being "over the limit" is a statutory issue. It is basically arbitrary. It has nothing to do with whether or not you are impaired. When I was first practicing the legal limit was .15. Then it went down to .10, then to .08. Did science change? No, just statutes changed. Some people may be lit up at .04...others can function at .15.
Its like speeding. Was it unsafe for you to drive 71 mph in a 60 mph zone? Maybe not. But that 60 was an arbitrary limit set by some governing body.....not a function of actual safeness.
-
Shit man, I drive at 2.6 normal, shit.
-
Report: Josh Gordon Has 'Better Than 50-50' Chance of NFL Reinstatement in 2017
"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 -
It was 0.09 Gip. Enough to get you sent to drunk school. Thing is, a lot of people don't think they're over the limit at that level, but they are. From my ER experience, once you get to the 0.15+ level, certainly 0.2+ that's when you ARE a danger on the road, and serious crashes are almost inevitable, unless you're a major alky that's built up a tolerance. I've mentioned in the past the highest BAC I saw from a driver (accident of course) was 0.43 .
According to the book, he should have been unconscious, not driving a car.
Being "over the limit" is a statutory issue. It is basically arbitrary. It has nothing to do with whether or not you are impaired. When I was first practicing the legal limit was .15. Then it went down to .10, then to .08. Did science change? No, just statutes changed. Some people may be lit up at .04...others can function at .15.
Its like speeding. Was it unsafe for you to drive 71 mph in a 60 mph zone? Maybe not. But that 60 was an arbitrary limit set by some governing body.....not a function of actual safeness.
Being "over the limit" is a statutory issue. It is basically arbitrary. It has nothing to do with whether or not you are impaired. When I was first practicing the legal limit was .15. Then it went down to .10, then to .08. Did science change? No, just statutes changed. Some people may be lit up at .04...others can function at .15.
Its like speeding. Was it unsafe for you to drive 71 mph in a 60 mph zone? Maybe not. But that 60 was an arbitrary limit set by some governing body.....not a function of actual safeness.
Follow the money.
WSS
-
I don't get all this. He's let the Browns organisation down for five years.
He even instagrammed burning the browns uniform?
The blokes a cunt.
-
#FreeJoshGordon
#PLAYtheMAN
#12FlashBackers
-
I don't get all this. He's let the Browns organisation down for five years.
He even instagrammed burning the browns uniform?
The blokes a cunt.
The blokes a cunt.
Maybe... but he was the best cunt of a WR we've seen in decades. Is he still? Hope to find out...
Hope they let him into England...
-
Player wise I wouldn't ever be negative. I still remember him catching a slant in New England and making Talib look like a child, he just jogged away from him for about a 40 yard TD. It was ridiculous.
The instagram stuff was unforgivable for me. He doesn't want to be here. It's been obvious for a long time.
-
What did Jim Brown say about the way they talked to him? That he would have stayed and played another year at least if they would have treated him differently...
The way Hue left it out there when he was asked about Gordon was wrong. He could have simply said that he understood and he would have Gordon's back and that when he was better he would love to have him be able to be a part of the team.
I think that we embrace Josh and let him know that we care about HIM and we want him to play here for us would go a long way.
Back the Flash.
-
That's absolute nonsense PoG.
They gave him the reps as the number one receiver and he then bailed before the season. So not only were we without him he took the reps off of WRs that were playing.
He's treated the Browns like shit ever since he arrived HE DOES NOT WANT TO PLAY FOR US.
-
That's absolute nonsense PoG.
They gave him the reps as the number one receiver and he then bailed before the season. So not only were we without him he took the reps off of WRs that were playing.
He's treated the Browns like shit ever since he arrived HE DOES NOT WANT TO PLAY FOR US.
That's absolute nonsense PoG.
They gave him the reps as the number one receiver and he then bailed before the season. So not only were we without him he took the reps off of WRs that were playing.
He's treated the Browns like shit ever since he arrived HE DOES NOT WANT TO PLAY FOR US.
If he gets reinstated- he doesn't have a choice this season. It would be stupid for the Browns to cut him. He's only due $1 million on his rookie deal- and that probably would get prorated considering he's going to miss some games regardless. That's dirt cheap for the talent level he's flashed in the past. BTW, he's only a RFA in 2018- meaning if he wants to get paid that year- (or go elsewhere) he had damn well better not dog it this year. If he gets on the field, and shows his old form, the Browns would doubtless slap a first round tender on him. Some other team offers him $10 million- the Browns can say thank you very much, we'll take the first round pick and have three first rounders (not counting the three second round picks) in the 2018 draft. Happy now?
-
That's absolute nonsense PoG.
They gave him the reps as the number one receiver and he then bailed before the season. So not only were we without him he took the reps off of WRs that were playing.
He's treated the Browns like shit ever since he arrived HE DOES NOT WANT TO PLAY FOR US.
If he gets reinstated- he doesn't have a choice this season. It would be stupid for the Browns to cut him. He's only due $1 million on his rookie deal- and that probably would get prorated considering he's going to miss some games regardless. That's dirt cheap for the talent level he's flashed in the past. BTW, he's only a RFA in 2018- meaning if he wants to get paid that year- (or go elsewhere) he had damn well better not dog it this year. If he gets on the field, and shows his old form, the Browns would doubtless slap a first round tender on him. Some other team offers him $10 million- the Browns can say thank you very much, we'll take the first round pick and have three first rounders (not counting the three second round picks) in the 2018 draft. Happy now?
If he gets reinstated- he doesn't have a choice this season. It would be stupid for the Browns to cut him. He's only due $1 million on his rookie deal- and that probably would get prorated considering he's going to miss some games regardless. That's dirt cheap for the talent level he's flashed in the past. BTW, he's only a RFA in 2018- meaning if he wants to get paid that year- (or go elsewhere) he had damn well better not dog it this year. If he gets on the field, and shows his old form, the Browns would doubtless slap a first round tender on him. Some other team offers him $10 million- the Browns can say thank you very much, we'll take the first round pick and have three first rounders (not counting the three second round picks) in the 2018 draft. Happy now?
I think that's exactly how it will play out if he can stay on the field.
-
That's absolute nonsense PoG.
They gave him the reps as the number one receiver and he then bailed before the season. So not only were we without him he took the reps off of WRs that were playing.
He's treated the Browns like shit ever since he arrived HE DOES NOT WANT TO PLAY FOR US.
If he gets reinstated- he doesn't have a choice this season. It would be stupid for the Browns to cut him. He's only due $1 million on his rookie deal- and that probably would get prorated considering he's going to miss some games regardless. That's dirt cheap for the talent level he's flashed in the past. BTW, he's only a RFA in 2018- meaning if he wants to get paid that year- (or go elsewhere) he had damn well better not dog it this year. If he gets on the field, and shows his old form, the Browns would doubtless slap a first round tender on him. Some other team offers him $10 million- the Browns can say thank you very much, we'll take the first round pick and have three first rounders (not counting the three second round picks) in the 2018 draft. Happy now?
If he gets on the field, and shows his old form, the Browns would doubtless slap a first round tender on him. Some other team offers him $10 million- the Browns can say thank you very much, we'll take the first round pick and have three first rounders (not counting the three second round picks) in the 2018 draft. Happy now?
All good up to here H^^the rest maybe some real Fantasy Football at best..All in the hands of the Harvard Hustlers..Really wish Josh luck seeing Week 17..no matter where this train may turn..don't see long term deals? but matching a few 1 year deals maybe? IF he even has the chance to open a Browns Locker-room Door again..Get ready for a 17 page'uurrrrrrr tread
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