Josh Gordon Will Not Be Fully Reinstated If New Policy Is Approved

[jonathanlambert33]

https://twitter.com/MatthewBerryTMR/status/510156582009962496

 

[footballplaya52]

bullshit

 

[TTN2810]

Sooo many conflicting reports on this shit. I'm not even gonna read these repots, I'll just wait for whatever happens.

 

[jonathanlambert33]

8 game suspension when policy is approved according to Schefter.

 

[Hurricane Season]

I'll laugh when the policy isn't officially approved until week 8.

 

[elcheato]

They're not going to tact on 8 games to the games he's already served. He'd be eligible to return in week 9 regardless of when the policy is accepted, unless it's accepted after week 9 obviously. 
 
Still don't see why he's going to be suspended at all, when his suspension is being reduced because of the new policy, because he wouldn't have been suspended in the first place. 

 

[jonathanlambert33]

He's he's effectively serving it now.

And he wouldn't be suspended under the new agreement? Are they making it ok to smoke all you want?

 

[elcheato]

The threshold for a positive test is going to be raised from 15 ng/ml to 35 ng/ml (if what I'm reading is right). His "positive" test was at 16 ng/ml.  

 

[jonathanlambert33]

From what I've read the difference is that his test came in the 2013 calendar year while the others came in this year.

 

[elcheato]

I know that's why, I just don't accept that premise. It had to have been near the end of 2013 too. Whatever. I'll take 8 games over the full year. 

 

[jonathanlambert33]

Personally I think it's easy. If you were suspended under the old policy then you serve the suspension. Anything else leaves to much grey area, as we see here.

 

[elcheato]

It just leaves a bitter taste when the new policy was in discussion and close to acceptable after the suspension was handed down. It's basically admitting the old policy was outdated, yet still upholding a suspension that would never have happened under the new one.
 
I do get the idea of not leaving a grey area, but exceptions should be made if someone is still suffering the consequences of the old policy when the new one is enacted and is admitting faults.
 
People are still serving long (even life) sentences for absurd laws for a one time possession of crack cocaine that targeted urban areas, laws that have since been changed and should reverse decisions and release people on time served. Obviously the comparison is way out there and highly irrelevant, but that's my thing. 

 

[elcheato]

Apparently its going to be 10 games, and then add another two if he's convicted of his DWI. And since he'd be coming back after 10-12 games instead of a whole, we lose a whole year on his contract. 
 
So basically this is the worst possible scenario. 

 

[jonathanlambert33]

I've had such a fantasy hit this week.

 

[elcheato]

Also, to go back on what you said about not leaving  a grey area. 10 games is the new suspension for a fourth violation, which is what Gordon is going to get his reduced to. So basically, they're using the new policy for his suspension length, but they're using the old policy for the allowable amount of marijuana in your system. Makes zero sense. 
 
How can you uphold the old policy with his positive test, and then ignore it and use the new one for his suspension length? 

 

[jonathanlambert33]

How can you suspend a player who knocked out his wife only 2 games?

We're talking about the NFL here. It's all a grey area with them.

 

[TTN2810]

Also, to go back on what you said about not leaving  a grey area. 10 games is the new suspension for a fourth violation, which is what Gordon is going to get his reduced to. So basically, they're using the new policy for his suspension length, but they're using the old policy for the allowable amount of marijuana in your system. Makes zero sense. 
 
How can you uphold the old policy with his positive test, and then ignore it and use the new one for his suspension length? 

Right. Because he tested positive during the previous policy. He's "lucky" they are letting him use the new policy's length. It's better than the full year he "technically" should be getting, since, again, he tested positive during the old policy.
 
I just want him back ASAP because I was able to get him in my fantasy league lol

 

[Giantmetfan07]

It's even more baffling that he gets 10 games while Hardy is still playing. 

 

[elcheato]

Right. Because he tested positive during the previous policy. He's "lucky" they are letting him use the new policy's length. It's better than the full year he "technically" should be getting, since, again, he tested positive during the old policy.
 
I just want him back ASAP because I was able to get him in my fantasy league lol

Not the point. Be consistent. Don't pick and choose what you're using from each policy

 

[Giantmetfan07]

I actually agree with Dan. Can't give him the suspension length of the new policy while ignoring that it wouldn't even be a positive test under the new policy.