Jump to content

Will Josh Gordon play this year, after all?


Recommended Posts

 

Not neccesarily. Work places often have rules to regulate things to protect their image that may exceed rules and punishments established by civil norms. As an example, a restaurant may have hygiene or wardrobe regulations for it's employees. Violation of these rules may result in penalties such as days off without pay and repeated violations could lead to long term "suspension" or termination. These penalties exceed those that would be issued in civil or criminal cases but are within the right of the employer to protect their corporate image.

 

The NFL has the right to levy stricter penalties than normal criminal or civil cases, in order to protect their brand. As to whether this works as a detergent compared to the alternative, I couldn't say unless I saw that strategy in action.

I didn't say they didn't have the right, the union agreed to it. But how are the NFL penalties determined? Shouldn't it be non-arbitrary since we're talking about putting them in conditions that may worsen their addiction and ruin careers, wherein they have not quantified a benefit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 107
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

I didn't say they didn't have the right, the union agreed to it. But how are the NFL penalties determined? Shouldn't it be non-arbitrary since we're talking about putting them in conditions that may worsen their addiction and ruin careers, wherein they have not quantified a benefit?

I hope they are not arbitrary. I know some are based strictly on precedence, while others (like the new domestic violence clause) appear to be well defined. I also hope they provide structured counseling during long term suspensions like the one handed down to Gordon, but at the end of the day that is not really their responsibility. Rehabilitation ultimately is the responsibility of the individual, even though there should be a moral obligation or at least a selfish financial obligation of support provided by those closest to the player, including the team that benefits from their athleticism.

 

Whoa!

@ProFootballTalk: A new drug testing agreement could benefit Wes Welker and Josh Gordon http://t.co/iXTwpZxd0L

 

Florio said if new substance policy is in play by Sunday, Gordon could have suspension lifted.

So if they are willing to retroactively reduce suspension already handed down, why wouldn't they increase Ray Rice's suspension to 6 games in accordance to that change? Shouldn't be able to have it both ways...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So if they are willing to retroactively reduce suspension already handed down, why wouldn't they increase Ray Rice's suspension to 6 games in accordance to that change? Shouldn't be able to have it both ways...

 

i dont know if you missed it but rice is now indefinite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sigmund Bloom@SigmundBloom 6m

Schefter reporting Gordon suspension will be 8 games. assuming that means we'll see him week 10

 

It will be reduced to a 12 game suspension so he can come back in time to play the Bills in week 13! I'm kidding of course...

 

If he gets 12, he will miss the Bill game. Their bye week is really early, like week 4.

 

Well my math and guess may have been slightly off but I knew he would be back in time for Buffalo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jay Feely, a rep and intimately involved in negotiations, very clearly INTIMATED that Gordon WILL NOT be suspended for any games.

@MichaelSalfino

 

 

Quote from the video from Jay Feely, who is on the NFLPA executive committee:

A guy who may have tested and his THC level was minute, but it popped him, he could then in retro... we fought hard for this policy to be enacted and have it retroactive so that anyone from the end of last season who tested positive, who under this new deal wouldn't have tested positive, would have it applied retroactively.

Edited by section122
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...