• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

Gordon suspension reduced to 10, 12 if convicted of DWI

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Devil's advocate here, but all of that logic is built on the premise that pot smoking does indeed effect his game.

Sure. I mean, I'm not arguing -- and I don't think the NFL would argue -- that smoking pot in April is going to affect how you play in September. On the other hand, being high/fried during practice or a game would. I think most of us have heard rumors of someone on another Cleveland Sports team perhaps not being entirely clear-headed when necessary. And of course, pot smoking certainly affected his game in college, because he was booted off teams as a result.

The tough part comes with how you draw the line, and basically, the NFL puts a lot more trust in players who don't have a history of drug use affecting their play.
 
Sure. I mean, I'm not arguing -- and I don't think the NFL would argue -- that smoking pot in April is going to affect how you play in September. On the other hand, being high/fried during practice or a game would. I think most of us have heard rumors of someone on another Cleveland Sports team perhaps not being entirely clear-headed when necessary. And of course, pot smoking certainly affected his game in college, because he was booted off teams as a result.

The tough part comes with how you draw the line, and basically, the NFL puts a lot more trust in players who don't have a history of drug use affecting their play.


One thing with the NFL though, is that if something were having a strong negative impact on a players performance then that player can simply be cut. The non-guaranteed NFL contracts would seem likely to serve the same purpose as these suspensions/banishment's by default. If a players struggling in practice because he can't show up sober, a team's unlikely to offer that guy very much in any type of signing bonus / guaranteed money. I can understand the image issue in regards to recreational drug use among NFL players, but the economics of the NFL are already structured that performance issues shouldn't need additional checks.
 
Under the Apples to Oranges comparison category...


 
Last edited:
Under the Apples to Oranges comparison category...


Albert Breer ‏@AlbertBreer 4m
NFL sent a letter to all owners today announcing new standards for domestic violence. First offense: 6 games; Second offense: Lifetime ban.

I wonder if this puts Ray Rice in the "one more strike" area, or if it starts now..

On a side note, this is really good of the NFL, but they can't continue to look at black & white only.. If someone shows up on a report that is proven to be falsely filed (happens literally all the time), are they out on technicality? One thing I can say is that with the status of all of these players and the league itself, showing a strict tolerance towards domestic abusers sends a vastly different message than booting someone for a full year for puffing weed.
 
Under the Apples to Oranges comparison category...


Albert Breer ‏@AlbertBreer 4m
NFL sent a letter to all owners today announcing new standards for domestic violence. First offense: 6 games; Second offense: Lifetime ban.
So what the NFL is saying that they have discretion to enforce new policies as they see fit, regardless of what the players union wants. So the fact that Gordon's rule "was collectively bargained" is pretty irrelevant.

Also, this means that Rice's suspension should've been 6 games. Why is it 2? Why couldn;t he have been suspended 6 games if they figured 6 games is a good idea for first offense?

Basically, Goodell is arbitrarily changing the rules, and it just so happens to help the Ravens and not help the Browns.
 
Yeah I don't get that either. If the NFL has decided that the appropriate punishment for domestic violence is 6 games for a first offense, then shouldn't Ray Rice be suspended 6 games?
 
Yeah I don't get that either. If the NFL has decided that the appropriate punishment for domestic violence is 6 games for a first offense, then shouldn't Ray Rice be suspended 6 games?

Double jeopardy?

Seriously though, these standards are basically carte blanche for crazy women as well. Looking forward to the hilarity that will ensue and inevitable hypocrisy by the NFL in attempting this scramble to rectify their initial mistake.
 
So what the NFL is saying that they have discretion to enforce new policies as they see fit, regardless of what the players union wants. So the fact that Gordon's rule "was collectively bargained" is pretty irrelevant.

Also, this means that Rice's suspension should've been 6 games. Why is it 2? Why couldn;t he have been suspended 6 games if they figured 6 games is a good idea for first offense?

Basically, Goodell is arbitrarily changing the rules, and it just so happens to help the Ravens and not help the Browns.

I was about to ask this, but I assumed I was just missing a point. So the NFL deems 6 games for first offense a good idea? Why did Rice get 2 games then....?

Durr. Fuckin NFL, what a bunch of idiots.
 
The better question is what took the NFL this long to put parameters in place for dealing with domestic violence.
 
10371399_359010654252935_3295070866966488262_n.jpg
 
I wanted to put Joe Thomas' reaction in here regarding the Marijuana punishment. As I kind of expected, the matter of the drug policy is brushed off until the end of negotiations and then just gets left as-is. This is most likely because drug punishments only effect a small percentage of the NFL and you have honks like Sean O'Hara and other extremely conservative players not exactly looking out for guys with issues/ different upbringings. Naturally, when it gets brought up, I bet the NFL won't budge and it isn't because the policy blows, it's because you don't want to give that extra inch in negotiations.

“Looking at the NFL drug program, I think they haven’t really touched it in a lot of years because it’s kind of been the one thing when you’re collectively bargaining that it kind of gets put to the end and then when you’re close on a deal you just say, ‘Ah, let’s just leave it how it’s been,’ rather than actually work on maybe some issues that are there,” Thomas said Thursday night after the Browns’ 33-13 win over the Chicago Bears in the preseason finale. “The problem is that now you’re sitting in a situation where you have a collective bargaining agreement that lasts 10 years, and in the middle of it, nobody’s going to want to go back to the bargaining table and try to hash out things that may be an issue, as they clearly are on a number of different levels, but that are only going to affect a couple of people.

“I think there’s a resistance from management of the NFL and also from the players association to do that type of needed updating of the drug policy because obviously there’s some oversights when they wrote the program and some cultural changes that have happened that I don’t think the program accurately reflects the morals of society today and the NFL and pro sports in general.”

Thomas also referenced a complaint many fans have raised about the NFL’s policies.

Under the NFL’s personal conduct policy, Commissioner Roger Goodell suspended Baltimore Ravens running back Ray Rice two games for assaulting his then-fiancee and current wife in February. Gordon, a repeat offender of the substance-abuse policy, won’t even be eligible to apply for reinstatement into the league until, at the earliest, the upcoming season concludes.

“Obviously [NFL] Commissioner [Roger Goodell] got a lot of flack for what happened with Ray Rice, and I think with the discipline policy he has cart blanche to do whatever he wants,” Thomas said. “But with the drug policy, that’s collectively bargained. Until him and [NFLPA Executive Director] DeMaurice Smith actually want to get together and fix some of it, I think we’re going to be stuck with an outdated policy.”

http://www.ohio.com/sports/browns/b...tdated-plus-plenty-on-johnny-manziel-1.517839
 
BS. MLB and the MLBPA did exactly this with their drug testing program. It is more of an issue with the incompetence of the NFLPA and NFL to work on the program if they feel their is an issue. Those two sides realized that the system wasn't working for either side or the game and went back and came up with solutions. The league and players assocation could absolutely collaborate and come up with system improvements. The simple fact that the players and owners think this is a 'once and done' thing just shows that. This has more to do with the working relationship of the union and owners group- in this case, the players union is neutered and doesn't want to 'shake things up' even when it makes sense for both sides to open a dialogue. More passing of the buck.
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-13: "Backup Bash Brothers"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:11: "Clipping Bucks."
Top