NFL Offseason Thread

[derspiess]

I bet you're not.  Not during the 90 day probationary period.

I had to agree to the social media policy.  Not sure if Languish counts for that or not.

[derspiess]

Stopped by the Bengals camp today.  Tyler Eifert is looking great in camp, which means come regular season we'll see him get thrown to a total of 3 times.  And Jason Campbell is just plain terrible but will probably make the team since they need a veteran backup. 

[Valmy]

Jason Campbell is just plain terrible

Yes....yes he is.

[sbr]

http://deadspin.com/report-nfl-drug-testing-is-screwed-up-and-screwed-josh-1612809023

Report: NFL Drug Testing Is Screwed Up And Screwed Josh Gordon

Mike Florio at Pro Football Talk has some very interesting details about Josh Gordon's failed marijuana test that has him facing a full-season suspension. And if it's true, the NFL's drug testing procedure is more messed up than we could have imagined—and Josh Gordon doesn't deserve a suspension.

Gordon's appeal of his 16-game suspension, which is scheduled to be heard on Friday, will reportedly hinge on inconsistencies in measurement of his urine sample, which was split into two containers. Florio:

Urine samples routinely are split into two bottles, the "A" bottle and the "B" bottle. If the "A" bottle generates a positive result, the "B" bottle is tested. Amazingly, the "B" bottle doesn't have to independently show a violation. Instead, the substance abuse policy states that the "'B' bottle Test need only show that the substance, revealed in the 'A' bottle Test, is evident to the 'limits of detection' to confirm the results of the 'A' bottle Test."

[...]

For Gordon, the "A" bottle showed a concentration of 16 ng/ml, only one nanogram per milliliter above the limits of 15. The "B" bottle showed a concentration of 13.6 ng/ml — less than the threshold.

To emphasize, Gordon's "A" and "B" bottles came from the same urine sample. The "B" was only tested to confirm that the "A" wasn't tainted or wildly out of bounds—it doesn't matter that the "B" wouldn't have been a violation had it arbitrarily been labeled the "A" bottle, or that there was a sizable discrepancy between the two tested bottles. It's tough shit for Josh Gordon, despite the fact that his urine averaged out to be below allowable limits.

But, this is how the NFL's Policy and Program for Substances of Abuse (the renegotiation of which has more or less been going on for three years) dictates testing should go. It's the same document that mandated Gordon, a repeat offender, be tested every few days.

Per a source with knowledge of the situation, Gordon landed in Stage III of the program last year as part of a negotiated two-game suspension for the use of cough syrup that contained codeine. Once in Stage III, a player never leaves. And he must pass up to 10 drug tests per month.

According to the source, Gordon has passed at least 70 drug tests.

The NFL's marijuana policy is a retrograde embarrassment. It's not technically on appeal here, in what sounds like a pretty strong case for Josh Gordon, but maybe it should be.

Update: Per ESPN's Adam Schefter, Gordon's appeal will also maintain that his drug test was so marginally positive that it could have been the result of second-hand smoke.

Update No. 2: Bomani Jones has a different way to look at how screwed up the NFL's policy on marijuana is:

here's what's lost in this josh gordon story: the nfl threshold for marijuana is 15 ng/nl. the wada (World Anti-Doping Agency) standard? 150. ONE HUNDRED FIFTY.

[derspiess]

This Microsoft Surface rollout is gonna be... Interesting.

[CountDeMoney]

Gordon's appeal will also maintain that his drug test was so marginally positive that it could have been the result of second-hand smoke.

Meh, we didn't buy that one, either.  You've got to inhale a shit ton to get it into your bloodstream in order to test positive above the margins from "second-hand smoke".

[alfred russel]

Stephen A Smith suspended from ESPN for a week for saying stupid shit about the Ray Rice situation. Seems kind of unfair to hire guys to say stupid shit and "embrace the debate" and then suspend one of your top bullshit purveyors for not immediately realizing this is the one topic you shouldn't stay stupid shit about.

[sbr]

Gordon's appeal will also maintain that his drug test was so marginally positive that it could have been the result of second-hand smoke.

Meh, we didn't buy that one, either.  You've got to inhale a shit ton to get it into your bloodstream in order to test positive above the margins from "second-hand smoke".

Out of curiosity, do you know what those test limits were? 

Note again that the NFL's limits are 10 times lower than those of the World Anti-Doping Agency's.  I would assume that means the NFL limits are unusually low.

[sbr]

Stephen A Smith suspended from ESPN for a week for saying stupid shit about the Ray Rice situation. Seems kind of unfair to hire guys to say stupid shit and "embrace the debate" and then suspend one of your top bullshit purveyors for not immediately realizing this is the one topic you shouldn't stay stupid shit about.

I agree for the most part, hiring idiots then getting upset when they act like idiots seems distasteful.  A week suspension is nothing though, and ESPN knows how fast the news cycle goes and by the time Smith gets back no one will even remember why he was gone.

[sbr]

According to:  http://www.canorml.org/healthfacts/drugtestguide/drugtestdetection.html#time

50 ng/ml is "the standard in most government-required testing programs."

More than 3 times the NFL's limit.

[CountDeMoney]

Gordon's appeal will also maintain that his drug test was so marginally positive that it could have been the result of second-hand smoke.

Meh, we didn't buy that one, either.  You've got to inhale a shit ton to get it into your bloodstream in order to test positive above the margins from "second-hand smoke".

Out of curiosity, do you know what those test limits were? 

Note again that the NFL's limits are 10 times lower than those of the World Anti-Doping Agency's.  I would assume that means the NFL limits are unusually low.

Hell, I don't know what the exact numbers were, since it was all outsourced to labs, but there was a difference between the urine test and the blood test; if you failed the urine test, you could immediate appeal with a blood test for a more definitive result, but I believe the threshold for the blood test was lower.  Now driving under the influence, that's a lot lower, like down to 5ng/ml.  Bit more severe than fitness for duty standards.

[Barrister]

Okay, so here's the thing about marijuana and THC - it remains at detectable levels in urine for days, even weeks.

As a result it's impossible to draw conclusions about specific numbers or concentrations - all a drug test can tell you is that if you detect cannabinoids then that person has consumed some amount of majijuana in the last several days.

[CountDeMoney]

Okay, so here's the thing about marijuana and THC - it remains at detectable levels in urine for days, even weeks.

As a result it's impossible to draw conclusions about specific numbers or concentrations - all a drug test can tell you is that if you detect cannabinoids then that person has consumed some amount of majijuana in the last several days.

Dirty water is dirty water.  Actually, I'm glad the NFL has stricter rules for positive than the World Doping people; don't they regulate the Olympics and Tour de France?  Case: rested.

[sbr]

Okay, so here's the thing about marijuana and THC - it remains at detectable levels in urine for days, even weeks.

As a result it's impossible to draw conclusions about specific numbers or concentrations - all a drug test can tell you is that if you detect cannabinoids then that person has consumed some amount of majijuana in the last several days.

I, and everyone else, knows that.  It isn't my point, though it is a general gripe I have with THC testing.  In my job if I get hurt on the job I have to immediately pee in a cup for a drug test.  If hypothetically, I took a puff or two of weed on Saturday night at the Motley Crue concert then had something stupid happen next week I would be in trouble with my job even though it would be very clear that the THC in my system had nothing to do with my injury 7+ days later.  Understanding marijuana is currently an illegal substance, how does that make sense? 

The things I think are important in this Josh Gordon case:

• The NFL's test limits are very, very low. 15ng/ml which is 10 times lower than the World Anti_Doping Agency and 3 times lower than most government-required testing programs.


• He has been tested up to 10 times a month since last year and passed them all.  An unnamed source says he has passed 70 tests.


• If the tester had randomly put the 'B' label on the other cup Gordon would not have failed this test.


• The sample that failed was 1 ng/ml over the limit, the 'B' sample was not over the limit and the two averaged together was below the very low limit.

I know pot is only "legal" in 2 states, and is still against NFL rules, and the drug policy was collectively bargained but this case pisses me off.  How do you suppose someone could pass "at least 70" tests, then when he fails it is by the very slimmest of margins (1 ng/ml) in one of the most restrictive programs I can find out there?  I would imagine if someone is clean for that long and they smoked out their HTC levels would be much higher than that.

[sbr]

Okay, so here's the thing about marijuana and THC - it remains at detectable levels in urine for days, even weeks.

As a result it's impossible to draw conclusions about specific numbers or concentrations - all a drug test can tell you is that if you detect cannabinoids then that person has consumed some amount of majijuana in the last several days.

Dirty water is dirty water.  Actually, I'm glad the NFL has stricter rules for positive than the World Doping people; don't they regulate the Olympics and Tour de France?  Case: rested.

No shit.  He should embrace a much more Raven friendly habit; like beating his woman or covering up a murder.