Goodell, Gordon, Welker, and Rice

[Grogansghost]

Drafted Gordon but ended up dropping him because we have such short benches and it didn't look good for him.

 

Things started looking positive for him right after I dropped him -- but then all of the Ray Rice stuff blew up.

 

Of course, any decision still depends on the league and the NFLPA agreeing on a new drug policy for there to be a chance at leniency.

 

Just curious if people think the current climate will have any influence.

Edited September 10, 2014 by Grogansghost

[stevegrab]

None of the above, the two were never related and one isn't affecting the other.

 

The league and NFLPA may have known they were working on this new drug policy deal and that Gordon/Welker and others who were recently suspended may be allowed to be classified under the new rules. But that didn't mean they were (or were not) getting off, just that there was a chance they would.

[Grogansghost]

None of the above, the two were never related and one isn't affecting the other.

 

 

I agree that Goodell might do his best to keep the two issues completely separate.

 

If that's the case, what does your gut say he'll do:

Stick with the penalties they earned based when they committed their transgressions?

Or, apply the new punishments retroactively?

[stevegrab]

I agree that Goodell might do his best to keep the two issues completely separate.

 

If that's the case, what does your gut say he'll do:

Stick with the penalties they earned based when they committed their transgressions?

Or, apply the new punishments retroactively?

 

I don't really think that is Goodell's choice. My understanding is the new drug policy that they (NFLPA and NFL) are trying to pass has something specific in it that requires the league to apply the new policies retroactive to some date/timeline. It will either include Gordon, Welker and others, or it won't. Goodell and the NFL will simply comply with that decision and act accordingly.

[Shorttynaz]

I agree that Goodell might do his best to keep the two issues completely separate.

 

If that's the case, what does your gut say he'll do:

Stick with the penalties they earned based when they committed their transgressions?

Or, apply the new punishments retroactively?

 

Well - he just showed us this week that regardless of a penalty handed out - if he wants to change his mind - he will. I will never defend Ray Rice for what he did, and I hope he never plays again, but honestly - what's Goodell's word worth now? Hands out a penalty but if he choses down the road that a tougher one is warranted, he'll change his mind after the fact.. Glad he's not my boss and/or I don't need to go see him about punishments..

[Bring Back Pat!!!]

Gordon's suspension was in 2013 not 2014, so I wouldn't be surprised if it was left alone. Schefter is saying they will review each 2014 suspension individually. No word on if that's the same for 2013 suspensions.

[Grogansghost]

I don't really think that is Goodell's choice. My understanding is the new drug policy that they (NFLPA and NFL) are trying to pass has something specific in it that requires the league to apply the new policies retroactive to some date/timeline. It will either include Gordon, Welker and others, or it won't. Goodell and the NFL will simply comply with that decision and act accordingly.

 

 

It would make sense for them to handle it that way. thanks for the info.

[stethant]

I think it's tough to work out something complicated like this when 90% of your job has become reassuring people that you're not losing your job.

[dope man]

 

I don't really think that is Goodell's choice. My understanding is the new drug policy that they (NFLPA and NFL) are trying to pass has something specific in it that requires the league to apply the new policies retroactive to some date/timeline. It will either include Gordon, Welker and others, or it won't. Goodell and the NFL will simply comply with that decision and act accordingly.

 

THIS

[tazinib1]

Gordon's suspension was in 2013 not 2014, so I wouldn't be surprised if it was left alone. Schefter is saying they will review each 2014 suspension individually. No word on if that's the same for 2013 suspensions.

 

 

It won't be but I can see his suspension getting cut in half to 8 games. My only question is if it isn't interactive, what's the point? It's like telling me I'm going to prison for life for pot, but because this was LAST year, I'm still going to spend life in prison while Tom, Dick and Harry are set free.

Edited September 12, 2014 by tazinib1