Gordon suspension reduced to 10, 12 if convicted of DWI

[SixPACK]

Damn dude. Just said the first thing that came to mind.

Regardless if he's a screw up, I still got to interact with a star athlete about a pretty controvertial topic. Thought that was pretty cool.

Don't take it to heart. Chris is doing his best impersonation of b00b.

 

[Soda]

Damn dude. Just said the first thing that came to mind.

Regardless if he's a screw up, I still got to interact with a star athlete about a pretty controvertial topic. Thought that was pretty cool.

I think Josh is as dumb as they come, but if I met him in person, I'd treat him like a human. I have plenty of friends that are dumber and less successful than he.. I just hope he gets to where he needs to be.

 

[Chris]

Don't take it to heart. Chris is doing his best impersonation of b00b.

That, and I was also genuinely curious because I've seen multiple people reference a Gordon "year long ban" when his appeal hasn't eve been heard as far as I know. Wasn't sure if I missed something.

That was like 5% of it though. 95% was just me trying to be b00bie.

 

[ajz20]

So there is a rumor, by Mort and over at the OBR, that based on some type of technicality with the test... Gordon might actually have a shot to geta lesser penalty.

Keys or Moflo you hear anything about this?

 

[Soar]

Browns get the first crack at Rice Week 3 in Cleveland.

Be interesting to see if this story/outrage carries into that game.

 

[Soda]

So there is a rumor, by Mort and over at the OBR, that based on some type of technicality with the test... Gordon might actually have a shot to geta lesser penalty.

Keys or Moflo you hear anything about this?

If I recall correctly, I don't think Gordon failed a test this time.. Rather, he missed the testing window when he needed to take the test. I thought it's a no fault policy when you're in the substance abuse program, which would render a missed test as a failed test. The Union would certainly take aim at that, depending on the language in the CBA.

 

[SixPACK]

This is all I got....

Today though, word has leaked (via Chris Mortenson on NFL Live) that there may have been an elusive discovery uncovered that "some around the league" think a technicality could get Gordon on the field this season after all.

Information right now is scarce, as this potentially saucy bit of news is all Mortensen provided, but this would be an unexpected escape clause that could have strong ramifications on and off the field. It will be interesting to hear of the fullness and validity of this report.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

I'v 2 games for pounding your wife....

If we're looking to the NFL as the entity that is supposed to punish criminal behavior that has no relation to football, we're looking in the wrong place.

I'm curious as to why so many people assume it is the job of the NFL to punish wife-beaters, or other criminals, for that matter. The NFL clearly must impose discipline for offenses that are related to football. And to the extent there are issues surrounding whether or not particular conduct is "football-related", that stuff gets negotiated between the Player's Association and the league, and addressed specifically in the CBA. In terms of substance abuse, there were specific penalties negotiated for specific conduct, because quite simply, the criminal justice system is neither intended to nor capable of determining whether the performance of a player is being boosted or adversely affected (PED's versus recreational drugs). So, the league addresses that stuff specifically, in writing, so that everyone knows the punishments associated with particular acts.

But I think there is a real problem with what seems to be a growing trend of expecting sports leagues to police conduct that has nothing to do with their sport. Those leagues don't have courts, or real judges, or written codes that prescribe a range of punishments for particular non-sports related crimes. They inherently have to just make the shit up as they go along. No wonder some people aren't happy with the result.

What absolutely blows my mind with respect to this is the complete absence of any criticism of the criminal justice system. The average employer wouldn't do a damn thing about spousal abuse -- might not even know. And to the extent the employer did learn of it, a great many of them would say that they are going to let the courts handle it because that is what the courts are supposed to do.

Rice apparently was treated the same by the legal system as any other person under the same set of facts. The case was handled by a female DA, and that jurisdiction has a first time domestic violence offender program where you don't get convicted or sent to jail if you do a diversion program. So just think about what that means for a second. Beat up your wife/girlfriend/whatever, and that system is intended to let you off with no real punishment at all. That's what happens to everyone who beats their wife/girlfriend who isn't an NFL player. All those other women don't even get the satisfaction of seeing the guy lose a few hundred thousand. Nothing happens to them at all.

And, yet, nobody is bitching about that. Isn't the criminal justice system supposed to be the one imposing just penalties for beating up your wife/girlfriend? I'm just floored by people thinking that it is the NFL that is supposed to police that -- not the, you know, police. All the bitching is going up completely the wrong tree, because the fact that a woman got beaten up by someone other than an NFL player, and no real penalty was imposed on the guy, would have been the norm, and ignored by 99% of the population because it is so unremarkable. Yet, that is the core problem here. And utterly ignored.

I personally don't think the league should be in the business of imposing punishments for these kind of events, simply because they are not set up to do it, and there is no real way to maintain proportionality and fairness. What's the penalty is if you didn't hit your girlfriend, but rather just slugged some guy in a bar and broke his jaw? 3 games? 1 game? What if it is petty theft, or fraud, or tax evasion, or any other of the hundreds of offenses that are supposed to be handled by the criminal justice system we voters put into place? 6 games for a hit and run? It's ridiculous.

 

[polska2211]

If we're looking to the NFL as the entity that is supposed to punish criminal behavior that has no relation to football, we're looking in the wrong place.

I'm curious as to why so many people assume it is the job of the NFL to punish wife-beaters, or other criminals, for that matter. The NFL clearly must impose discipline for offenses that are related to football. And to the extent there are issues surrounding whether or not particular conduct is "football-related", that stuff gets negotiated between the Player's Association and the league, and addressed specifically in the CBA. In terms of substance abuse, there were specific penalties negotiated for specific conduct, because quite simply, the criminal justice system is neither intended to nor capable of determining whether the performance of a player is being boosted or adversely affected (PED's versus recreational drugs). So, the league addresses that stuff specifically, in writing, so that everyone knows the punishments associated with particular acts.

But I think there is a real problem with what seems to be a growing trend of expecting sports leagues to police conduct that has nothing to do with their sport. Those leagues don't have courts, or real judges, or written codes that prescribe a range of punishments for particular non-sports related crimes. They inherently have to just make the shit up as they go along. No wonder some people aren't happy with the result.

What absolutely blows my mind with respect to this is the complete absence of any criticism of the criminal justice system. The average employer wouldn't do a damn thing about spousal abuse -- might not even know. And to the extent the employer did learn of it, a great many of them would say that they are going to let the courts handle it because that is what the courts are supposed to do.

Rice apparently was treated the same by the legal system as any other person under the same set of facts. The case was handled by a female DA, and that jurisdiction has a first time domestic violence offender program where you don't get convicted or sent to jail if you do a diversion program. So just think about what that means for a second. Beat up your wife/girlfriend/whatever, and that system is intended to let you off with no real punishment at all. That's what happens to everyone who beats their wife/girlfriend who isn't an NFL player. All those other women don't even get the satisfaction of seeing the guy lose a few hundred thousand. Nothing happens to them at all.

And, yet, nobody is bitching about that. Isn't the criminal justice system supposed to be the one imposing just penalties for beating up your wife/girlfriend? I'm just floored by people thinking that it is the NFL that is supposed to police that -- not the, you know, police. All the bitching is going up completely the wrong tree, because the fact that a woman got beaten up by someone other than an NFL player, and no real penalty was imposed on the guy, would have been the norm, and ignored by 99% of the population because it is so unremarkable. Yet, that is the core problem here. And utterly ignored.

I personally don't think the league should be in the business of imposing punishments for these kind of events, simply because they are not set up to do it, and there is no real way to maintain proportionality and fairness. What's the penalty is if you didn't hit your girlfriend, but rather just slugged some guy in a bar and broke his jaw? 3 games? 1 game? What if it is petty theft, or fraud, or tax evasion, or any other of the hundreds of offenses that are supposed to be handled by the criminal justice system we voters put into place? 6 games for a hit and run? It's ridiculous.

This has been repeated ad nauseam... if the wife/girlfriend does not press charges (which in this case, Rice's did not), there is little that the justice system can do. If she had, this story would be entirely different.

 

[elcheato]

Is Josh Gordon facing another separate suspension for the DUI, or do players not get suspended for them?

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

This has been repeated ad nauseam... if the wife/girlfriend does not press charges (which in this case, Rice's did not), there is little that the justice system can do. If she had, this story would be entirely different.

Not true. Contrary to popular belief, the law does not require someone to "press charges" in order for a criminal charge and conviction to be obtained. What is usually meant by "press charges" is "will you testify against the person who did this", because you need sworn testimony. The district attorney -- who is female -- said that while that is often the case, it was not the case here because they had video that did not require the victim's testimony. All they'd need is the security guard or whomever to authenticate the tape.

Originally, both were charged with assault. Upon reviewing the complete tape, the charges against her were dropped, and the charges against him increased to aggravated battery. The grand jury actually returned an indictment on that charge, all without her testifying against him. According to the DA, he very likely could/would have been convicted but for the diversion program.

Why should the NFL play the role of national cop? I mean, think about the justification you used for the case not going forward -- the now wife (then girlfriend) did not want to press charges. If the DA respected that decision, why shouldn't the NFL? After all, they're married. Him being forced to sit out 2 games and lose 2 game checks hurts her financially as much as him. How does the victim benefit if her husband is bringing home less money?

Don't get me wrong -- I'm not saying he shouldn't be punished for this. I'm saying that he committed a crime, and should be punished criminally. Expecting his employer to impose a penalty when our justice system chose not to seems weird as hell to me. And the more the public starts to expect sports leagues to start playing the role of punishers for criminal acts, you're going to see all sorts of fucked-up, disproportionate things going on.

 

[GaryBriggs]

Most teams cover the cost and have their own personal driver(s) available to cater to players 24/7. Really just a phone call away.

This is true. It's also true that the teams collect information about who is using this service and use it against players during contract negotiations.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

This is true. It's also true that the teams collect information about who is using this service and use it against players during contract negotiations.

That's not going to be very persuasive in a contract negotiation unless the player is using it a lot, and in that case, the team should be worried about that. The solution to the team using it against a player for using it that much is either 1) quit drinking so much that you can't even afford to pay for your own cabs, or 2) if you don't want to do 1), then pay for your own cab.

My guess is that teams offer that service not as a player's first option -- which should be paying for his own cab -- but rather to give the player an option if he finds himself somewhere without cash and needs to cab home. It shouldn't be happening so much that it would be an issue at negotiations.

 

[elcheato]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>At least so far, the Browns are letting Josh Gordon avoid the media. Not cool. Also: It's a violation of NFL policy.</p>&mdash; Bart Hubbuch (@HubbuchNYP) <a href="https://twitter.com/HubbuchNYP/statuses/493463859060293632">July 27, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

This guy right here

 

[MalTalm]

This is true. It's also true that the teams collect information about who is using this service and use it against players during contract negotiations.

Something tells me that would play in Josh Gordon's favor during negotiations... :chuckles: