Possible early return for Jordan

"ckparrothead wrote:

Interesting that Wes Welker, Orlando Scandrick and Dion Jordan are being lumped together. Two of them tested positive for amphetamines because of tainted molly. One of them tested positive for amphetamines because of... ?

Molly is the dumbest term ever. It's just ecstasy or E. Mollies are supposed to be pure MDMA. Back in the day they were called ... wait for it ... "pures." So if you have tainted mollies they're just ... ecstasy.

And don't ask me how I know all of this. Pures or "mollies" are supposed to be 100% pure mdma, in a capsule. Anything else is just ecstasy. Anyway carry on. About Dion Jordan.

No matter which name you call it, the chances of buying what you think is pure MDMA actually being pure MDMA is pretty low.

The DEA says only 13% of the Molly seized in New York state the last four years actually contained any MDMA, and even then it often was mixed with other drugs. The drugs frequently found in Molly are Methylone, MDPV, 4-MEC, 4-MMC, Pentedrone and MePP.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/22/health/9-things-molly-drug/

"Colmax wrote:

Suggesting that the marijuana metabolite would show up in a player's urine drug screen (with any significance) simply because he is in the same room with someone who is smoking marijuana is pretty farfetched.

Passive inhalation may show very minimal levels of the metabolite (<5 ng/mL), but the likelihood of this is uncommon, and the conditions would have to be "severe".

The cutoff levels on these screens are usually around 10-20 ng/mL (in some cases, even higher), which is ridiculously low.

If these players are testing positive, they are indulging.

I'm not going to get into my background. but I know first hand that it is not far-fetched at all. Besides, I clearly stated that it showed up without any significance...which is why no other organization counts such trivial amounts.

"djphinfan wrote:

If you don't have a specific plan for your million dollar investment than you don't have the correct people in place..John Jerry is not the example you wanna use my friend, he failed because he had bad supervision and no discipline.

1. how do you know Jordan has discipline?
2. the fact that the third overall pick needs proper supervision to be successful is a red flag in and of itself.

Update:

Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk reports that the NFL and NFLPA have reached a tentative agreement regarding a third-party arbitrator overhearing appeals stemming from PED and HGH violations.

According to Florio’s source, a form of neutral arbitration would be used under the current tentative agreement.

This still leaves the issue of the NFL wanting to impose suspensions for players that arrested for DUI’s even before the case has gone through court.

PFT spoke to one source who said that he’s “expecting an announcement at any time.”

It’s hard to say what will end up happening with suspended players, but there is at least some optimism that they could be reduced and/or removed all together as part of this agreement.

————

NFLPA assistant executive director of external affairs George Atallah told The Associated Press on Friday that the NFL is trying to include a provision that would allow them punish players for alleged DUI cases before the due process has played out.

“They want to immediately discipline for an arrest,” said Atallah, via USA Today. “…We prefer to discuss these issues directly with the union.”
•Albert Breer confirms that this issue remains a sticking point in the ongoing talks regarding a new drug policy.

Meanwhile, Clarence Hill reports that the NFLPA has “no plans of agreeing to a new policy that includes immediate suspensions for arrests for suspicion of DUI.”

Regarding suspension possibly being lifted, Hill reports that both parties are “undecided” on retroactively lifting suspensions and still aren’t sure how this will pertain to domestic abuse and the drug policy overall.

Hill adds that there is “no chance” of any suspended player suiting up in Week 1 given that an agreement is not coming today.

http://nfltraderumors.co/report-nfl-nflpa-very-close-to-an-agreement-on-new-drug-policy-that-would-lift-suspensions/

"PhinFan1968 wrote:

http://nfltraderumors.co/report-nfl-nflpa-very-close-to-an-agreement-on-new-drug-policy-that-would-lift-suspensions/

come on baby let this sh@& happen..

I have a feeling a possible reinstatement will be specific to Welker, Johnny Football's teammate Josh Gordon and a few random Dallas Cowboys players...

"roy_miami wrote:

I have a feeling a possible reinstatement will be specific to Welker, Johnny Football's teammate Josh Gordon and a few random Dallas Cowboys players...

Which would be illegal.

Iv'e always been a little disappointed in the NFL's cookie cutter drug policy. Fail a text (X game suspension) Fail twice (Y games suspended) etc. Add to that that part of these suspensions is removing them from what maybe the only real structure they have in their lives and it just seems counter productive.

I would love to see the NFL be more proactive in its approach. If a player has a drug or alcohol problem don't just suspend them force them to get help. A couple weeks or more in a facility to help deal with their problems would do more good than simply costing them a couple paychecks. Part of these kids problems is a lack of structure so don't just remove them from what maybe the only one they have. Allow the teams to take part in their rehab.

I am not saying that suspensions shouldn't be part of process I am just saying I think they should be doing more.

"KeyFin wrote:

I'm not going to get into my background. but I know first hand that it is not far-fetched at all. Besides, I clearly stated that it showed up without any significance...which is why no other organization counts such trivial amounts.

If the NFL has a "zero tolerance" policy, then the players should recognize this and abide by their rules. It is a privilege to play, not a right; regardless of how "trivial" the amount of a particular metabolite in a screen.

And how does this hurt the sport? A player plays if he follows the rules. I would say the NFL is doing it the right way, with no gray area.

To be fair, I could care less if a person decides to use marijuana; but the NFL is an organization which has its rules.

While it is my understanding that marijuana is unlikely to show up on a drug screen from passive inhalation, if you have "first-hand knowledge," enlighten me. Not being sarcastic. If you have knowledge of a subject (esp. one I am highly interested in), I would like to hear your side. Drug screens are part of my daily routine, and I have been to seminars with lab companies where this very subject was discussed. I am very open to hearing anyone's side in a discussion.....

"LandShark13 wrote:

Iv'e always been a little disappointed in the NFL's cookie cutter drug policy. Fail a text (X game suspension) Fail twice (Y games suspended) etc. Add to that that part of these suspensions is removing them from what maybe the only real structure they have in their lives and it just seems counter productive.

I would love to see the NFL be more proactive in its approach. If a player has a drug or alcohol problem don't just suspend them force them to get help. A couple weeks or more in a facility to help deal with their problems would do more good than simply costing them a couple paychecks. Part of these kids problems is a lack of structure so don't just remove them from what maybe the only one they have. Allow the teams to take part in their rehab.

I am not saying that suspensions shouldn't be part of process I am just saying I think they should be doing more.

If I am not mistaken, the NFL has these programs already in place.

Without getting into any legalities, I am not sure the NFL (as an organization) can forcibly make a player seek help. Maybe they can? Maybe they cannot?

While your idea seems like the right thing to do, I have some issue with it given it seems to be removing the "human" factor. These are grown men who are capable of making their own decisions. If they want help, the NFL would undoubtedly provide the means for that player get the help.

"roy_miami wrote:

I have a feeling a possible reinstatement will be specific to Welker, Johnny Football's teammate Josh Gordon and a few random Dallas Cowboys players...

josh gordon played at baylor. manzel play at a&m doubt they were buddies.

"muskrat21 wrote:

josh gordon played at baylor. manzel play at a&m doubt they were buddies.

Roy never said they're buddies. They just happen to be on the same team now. Teammates.

"Colmax wrote:

If the NFL has a "zero tolerance" policy, then the players should recognize this and abide by their rules. It is a privilege to play, not a right; regardless of how "trivial" the amount of a particular metabolite in a screen.

And how does this hurt the sport? A player plays if he follows the rules. I would say the NFL is doing it the right way, with no gray area.

To be fair, I could care less if a person decides to use marijuana; but the NFL is an organization which has its rules.

While it is my understanding that marijuana is unlikely to show up on a drug screen from passive inhalation, if you have "first-hand knowledge," enlighten me. Not being sarcastic. If you have knowledge of a subject (esp. one I am highly interested in), I would like to hear your side. Drug screens are part of my daily routine, and I have been to seminars with lab companies where this very subject was discussed. I am very open to hearing anyone's side in a discussion.....

Noone should follow unjust rules. If a player feels a rule restricts their personal freedom it should be broken.

"Colmax wrote:

If I am not mistaken, the NFL has these programs already in place.

Without getting into any legalities, I am not sure the NFL (as an organization) can forcibly make a player seek help. Maybe they can? Maybe they cannot?

While your idea seems like the right thing to do, I have some issue with it given it seems to be removing the "human" factor. These are grown men who are capable of making their own decisions. If they want help, the NFL would undoubtedly provide the means for that player get the help.

Help for what? There is absolutely nothing wrong with what Dion Jordan, Wes Welker or Gordon did. The NFL needs help, not these players.

"Alex44 wrote:

Help for what? There is absolutely nothing wrong with what Dion Jordan, Wes Welker or Gordon did. The NFL needs help, not these players.

Nothing wrong with buying Molly/Ecstasy off the street? Considering the poor chances of getting the real thing, and what you may get instead, it is just incredibly stupid. Gordon was suspended for weed, so the statement does not pertain to him.

"Alex44 wrote:

Noone should follow unjust rules. If a player feels a rule restricts their personal freedom it should be broken.

And then they should live w/ the results.

"Colmax wrote:

If the NFL has a "zero tolerance" policy, then the players should recognize this and abide by their rules. It is a privilege to play, not a right; regardless of how "trivial" the amount of a particular metabolite in a screen.

And how does this hurt the sport? A player plays if he follows the rules. I would say the NFL is doing it the right way, with no gray area.

To be fair, I could care less if a person decides to use marijuana; but the NFL is an organization which has its rules.

While it is my understanding that marijuana is unlikely to show up on a drug screen from passive inhalation, if you have "first-hand knowledge," enlighten me. Not being sarcastic. If you have knowledge of a subject (esp. one I am highly interested in), I would like to hear your side. Drug screens are part of my daily routine, and I have been to seminars with lab companies where this very subject was discussed. I am very open to hearing anyone's side in a discussion.....

I already explained in detail, earlier in this discussion, that zero tolerance is ridiculous when ANYTHING in your local GNC store can contain trace amounts of banned substances. From the protein bars to energy shakes to Red Bull, they are all classified as dietary supplements and not regulated by the FDA. That means the label you read is worthless because there's nobody to ensure that's exactly what's inside the bottle.

As for the marijuana, people smoke it....and then exhale a large amount of it back into the air. Just like your body doesn't absorb more than 15-25% of a multivitamin that stays inside your digestive tract for several hours, your body does not absorb but a small percentage of the THC in pot in 3-5 seconds. That's not rocket science. So if you're sitting nearby while someone is smoking, it is entirely possible for you to get just as high as they are if ventilation is not adequate. We weren't talking about getting high though....we were talking about a positive test result in a zero-tolerance system. It is very easy to do if you are around the drug even a little bit.

"KeyFin wrote:

I already explained in detail, earlier in this discussion, that zero tolerance is ridiculous when ANYTHING in your local GNC store can contain trace amounts of banned substances. From the protein bars to energy shakes to Red Bull, they are all classified as dietary supplements and not regulated by the FDA. That means the label you read is worthless because there's nobody to ensure that's exactly what's inside the bottle.

As for the marijuana, people smoke it....and then exhale a large amount of it back into the air. Just like your body doesn't absorb more than 15-25% of a multivitamin that stays inside your digestive tract for several hours, your body does not absorb but a small percentage of the THC in pot in 3-5 seconds. That's not rocket science. So if you're sitting nearby while someone is smoking, it is entirely possible for you to get just as high as they are if ventilation is not adequate. We weren't talking about getting high though....we were talking about a positive test result in a zero-tolerance system. It is very easy to do if you are around the drug even a little bit.

Okay.

** EDIT - And the reason for the response is because the "GNC/FDA regulation" thing has been discussed ad nauseam in another thread. I'd really rather not get into it again. But thank you for your input. As for the marijuana metabolite thing, you have not given me much with which to discuss. **

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/09/06/nfl-wants-one-game-deactivation-with-pay-after-any-dui-arrest/

As the NFL and NFLPA continue to not have a deal on a new, comprehensive drug policy, some more facts have emerged regarding what the league specifically has proposed.

As to the claim that the NFL wants players to be suspended for DUI arrests before their legal cases have ended, a source with knowledge of the negotiations tells PFT that the NFL has proposed a one-game deactivation with pay for the next game after any DUI arrest. It’s not a suspension, and there would be no forfeiture of salary.

Also, the proposal would apply not only to players but also to any other team or league employees, including owners.

That’s a far more reasonable stance than the imposition of actual financial punishment before a case has been adjudicated.

Another sticking point remains regarding the NFL’s desire for a minimum two-game suspension for a first-offense DUI, following the conclusion of the legal process. It’s currently unclear whether the NFLPA would accept that term.

Whatever happens, it’s highly unlikely that suspended players will be unsuspended for Week One. By Week Two, it remains possible.

Can they really reverse this stuff legally or is this just throwin sh@& out there for next year?

"djphinfan wrote:

Can they really reverse this stuff legally or is this just throwin sh@& out there for next year?

I've read that it's possible some suspended players could play earlier than currently scheduled.

"Alex44 wrote:

Noone should follow unjust rules. If a player feels a rule restricts their personal freedom it should be broken.

If I am a business owner, and I have reasonable guidelines set in place for my employees, those guidelines should be followed. If you feel your "personal freedoms" are being obstructed, you are certainly 'free' to seek employment elsewhere. If you wish to not follow those simple rules, I will find someone else who will.

These players have a short shelf life. They have plenty of time to make a damned good living and live a privileged life free from "the man" once they retire.

I do not disagree that these people have the freedom to smoke the finest weed this side of the Carolinas, but if you are an employee of an organization that discourages this behavior, and you decide you have the freedom to do whatever the hell you want, that employer certainly has the freedom to punish you under those set guidelines. Don't blame the player, blame the game, right?? :up:

The player signs the contract. While a player can be "drafted", he does not have to sign anything. This isn't an Armed Forces type of draft. He can choose to smoke all of the weed he wants and seek employment at a place that is not as harsh as the NFL in their drug policies because he feels his personal freedoms would be in jeopardy. I am pretty sure said player will not be making as much of that "paper" he so desires......

Ian Rapoport ‏@RapSheet · 5m
A new drug deal, if agreed upon, would bring back players who tested positive for amphetamines: Welker, Scandrick, Dion Jordan, others

Ian Rapoport ‏@RapSheet · 8m
The @NFLPA as scheduled a vote tomorrow afternoon of the 32 player reps on the potential new drug policy, source says.

Albert Breer ‏@AlbertBreer · 6m
The NFLPA got the new proposal from the NFL tonight, and the language issues seem to be worked out. Good chance this is done tomorrow.