Browner 1 year suspension is for substance abuse per NFL

[Sac]

Clayton said you could fail 4 test before a suspension is ever levied. Browner could not face suspension at all.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Ok, that avatar scares me.

 

[Sac]

You don't like turkey?

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

You don't like turkey?

It's the puppy trapped inside that Turducken abomination that has me worried.

 

[KK84]

You don't like turkey?

It's the puppy trapped inside that Turducken abomination that has me worried.

That's one ugly puppy.

 

[253hawk]

F*** the NFL.

 

[c_hawkbob]

A positive test is a positive test. If it gets thrown out fine if not guilty and should get suspended.

BUT I agree 4 games not season

Failing; one substance abuse text doesn't equal any type of suspension. Thank God the truth is coming out (a witchhunt on Browner). I request a seat on the bus Bob.

Your in!

 

[Seatown001]

You don't like turkey?

Love it myself!

 

[KARAVARUS]

This is about to get shacked or locked.... Either way, on topic, suspension or no, I don't want BB back anymore.

 

[Donn2390]

This is about to get shacked or locked.... Either way, on topic, suspension or no, I don't want BB back anymore.

So if he is found to be innocent and there is no suspension, you don't want him back? That's very open mined of you. Court systems should work that way, even if found innocent, execute them anyway...

 

[chris98251]

He has such a big case against the NFL, the confidientiality policy, a false accusation, he says he didn't take anything or fail anything. There is smoke here and I am betting fire, the NFL is jumping all over to try to cover tracks etc and then there is Browners appeal hearing we are now waiting on. This is possibly why he is not offcially IR'ed yet, movement to this and then a retraction or reversal of the NFL could lock us into a situation still.

 

[Saints33]

Guess I'm gonna go on and ask a non football question about this. First off, is this his first offense? If so, yeah, this is BS. I understand that even if your state legalizes it, your employer may not and you can still get in trouble by them. I'm assuming this is just the case. I think its dumb they check for weed in NFL test. My question is, has there been any numbers on how much it has helped Washington's economy, jobs, gang levels going down, etc? I've never understood why it is illegal and wish Louisiana would legalize, though as a fireman I still wouldn't be able to smoke it. And, I am correct on it being Washington and maybe Oregon that legalized it? Or Wyoming,Colorado, somewhere around ya'll, haha?

 

[HawkFan72]

He has such a big case against the NFL, the confidientiality policy, a false accusation, he says he didn't take anything or fail anything. There is smoke here and I am betting fire, the NFL is jumping all over to try to cover tracks etc and then there is Browners appeal hearing we are now waiting on. This is possibly why he is not offcially IR'ed yet, movement to this and then a retraction or reversal of the NFL could lock us into a situation still.

Yeah if there wasn't anything to his case, he would have been put on IR by now or released.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Guess I'm gonna go on and ask a non football question about this. First off, is this his first offense? If so, yeah, this is BS. I understand that even if your state legalizes it, your employer may not and you can still get in trouble by them. I'm assuming this is just the case. I think its dumb they check for weed in NFL test. My question is, has there been any numbers on how much it has helped Washington's economy, jobs, gang levels going down, etc? I've never understood why it is illegal and wish Louisiana would legalize, though as a o :49ersmall: fireman I still wouldn't be able to smoke it. And, I am correct on it being Washington and maybe Oregon that legalized it? Or Wyoming,Colorado, somewhere around ya'll, haha?

From what I understand it's his first offense and that he voluntarily joined the drug program to help his draft status. Also he was put in stage 3 for missing tests while playing in the CFL when he was obviously not employed by the NFL.

Washington and Colorado are the states that legalized marijuana.

 

[Saints33]

Guess I'm gonna go on and ask a non football question about this. First off, is this his first offense? If so, yeah, this is BS. I understand that even if your state legalizes it, your employer may not and you can still get in trouble by them. I'm assuming this is just the case. I think its dumb they check for weed in NFL test. My question is, has there been any numbers on how much it has helped Washington's economy, jobs, gang levels going down, etc? I've never understood why it is illegal and wish Louisiana would legalize, though as a o :49ersmall: fireman I still wouldn't be able to smoke it. And, I am correct on it being Washington and maybe Oregon that legalized it? Or Wyoming,Colorado, somewhere around ya'll, haha?

From what I understand it's his first offense and that he voluntarily joined the drug program to help his draft status. Also he was put in stage 3 for missing tests while playing in the CFL when he was obviously not employed by the NFL.

Washington and Colorado are the states that legalized marijuana.

And I apologize since I haven't read all the details, but, he is getting suspended for a year for weed? That can't be right, heck, even if was his 10th time to be caught that is a dumb punishment.

 

[CANHawk]

This is about to get shacked or locked.... Either way, on topic, suspension or no, I don't want BB back anymore.

That's a pretty ignorant point of view IMO. If a deal for BB can be made that fits within the cap structure, I'd welcome Brandon Browner back with open arms right now. He has been MONEY for his entire tenure with the Hawks, save for a game or two. It's funny that you'd be willing to throw BB out right now for failing a piss test when, given the structure of the substance abuse program, half the team could have already failed ONE piss test and you wouldn't even know about it...

 

[mikeak]

My understanding is that he was put in as stage 1 due to perceived college issues. If that is the case why wouldn't a positive test suspend him 4 games?

I get the whole Clayton says etc but stage 1 to 2 is one failed test and would equal 4 games.

Not arguing what is right / wrong just trying to understand why people think he will get less than 4

 

[DavidSeven]

My understanding is that he was put in as stage 1 due to perceived college issues. If that is the case why wouldn't a positive test suspend him 4 games?

I get the whole Clayton says etc but stage 1 to 2 is one failed test and would equal 4 games.

Not arguing what is right / wrong just trying to understand why people think he will get less than 4

I don't think any of us knows the particulars of Browner's arrangement with the NFL, but it's possible to volunteer for the Stage 1 program without leaving yourself open to a suspension for one failed test. Browner volunteered for the program to improve his draft stock. It was not levied upon him by NFL.

Josh Freeman was also in Stage 1 of the program but was not in threat of a suspension for one failed test:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/97508 ... ug-program

 

[ChiefHawk]

Who paid for the drug test? If the NFL did, they could be a Heath Insurance Portability and Privacy Act (HIPPA) covered party, and if the NFL released the results, as a HIPPA covered entity, they could have compromised Private Health Information (PHI), and would be in violation of the HIPPA act for doing so.

It is possible that the players agreed to the NFL Substance Abuse programs in their contract, which may be construed as providing permission for the release under HIPPA, but if the NFL did not follow thier own policy, and are a covered entity in this case, then they violated HIPPA.

V/r
Guy who knows Privacy Law.

 

[CANHawk]

Who paid for the drug test? If the NFL did, they could be a Heath Insurance Portability and Privacy Act (HIPPA) covered party, and if the NFL released the results, as a HIPPA covered entity, they could have compromised Private Health Information (PHI), and would be in violation of the HIPPA act for doing so.

It is possible that the players agreed to the NFL Substance Abuse programs in their contract, which may be construed as providing permission for the release under HIPPA, but if the NFL did not follow thier own policy, and are a covered entity in this case, then they violated HIPPA.

V/r
Guy who knows Privacy Law.

Oh snap.

I really hope Mike Silver fries for this.