John Clayton says Browner could win his appeal

[12thManHawkFan]

so Browner could wind up moving into stage 2 with no suspension, then sue the fu$@ out of the NFL for the way this was handled. Then the Seahawks can extend him on the cheap since his reputation has been completely hammered......is this a win for Seattle maybe?

 

[dontbelikethat]

so Browner could wind up moving into stage 2 with no suspension, then sue the fu$@ out of the NFL for the way this was handled. Then the Seahawks can extend him on the cheap since his reputation has been completely hammered......is this a win for Seattle maybe?

Best case scenario would be something along the lines of that. And I agree that no news so far is good news.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

So if Browner gets off on a technicality like Sherman, can we stop saying the league hates Seattle?

 

[thebanjodude]

Did I read this correct, he didn't even fail an exam...the NFL is trying to suspend him, for an entire year, for missing test when he was out of the league for 5 years???

This whole thing is so confusing, what a mess.

The way I take it is, they kept failing him because he didn't show up for his random tests..... because he was up in Canada playing in the CFL? Is that correct?

WTF :34853_doh:

:sarcasm_on: BLAME CANADA! :lol: :sarcasm_off:

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Some technicality. He should never have been in that program in the first place. And to expect a person to keep testing when they're not even in the league is asinine.

 

[Sac]

Some technicality. He should never have been in that program in the first place. And to expect a person to keep testing when they're not even in the league is asinine.

This

 

[hawk45]

Yeah...in Sherman's situation it's not like the league wanted that outcome; it calls into question their testing procedures. They didn't give anything to us there, Sherman fought and won.

In Browner's situation, again, even if he wins it won't be because of any sense of justice on the part of the NFL. It seems there'll be huge egg on their face no matter how this turns out.

I'm not saying the league has it in for the Seahawks here, but I am saying that Sherman and Browner prevailing because the league is incompetent is in no way evidence of positive or neutral feelings on Seattle by the league. It's just evidence of an incompetent league in those 2 situations.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Some technicality. He should never have been in that program in the first place. And to expect a person to keep testing when they're not even in the league is asinine.

Why shouldn't he have been in the program in the first place? Browner didn't get put in the program in 2005 for no reason, he obviously got caught for something.

I get what his lawyers are saying, he SHOULD have been notified. But that doesn't take away the fact that he violated the illegal substance rule.

 

[Sac]

Some technicality. He should never have been in that program in the first place. And to expect a person to keep testing when they're not even in the league is asinine.

Why shouldn't he have been in the program in the first place? Browner didn't get put in the program in 2005 for no reason, he obviously got caught for something.

I get what his lawyers are saying, he SHOULD have been notified. But that doesn't take away the fact that he violated the illegal substance rule.

Because after 2 years in phase 2 it rests and drops off your record. He was out of the NFL for longer than 2 years. He shouldn't have even been in phase 1.

 

[plyka]

"@_BVM: Browner was advanced to Stage 3 of the substance abuse policy for missing tests while in the CFL 5 years. Tested clean 200 times since 2011."

There's gotta be something more to this. After fighting so hard to make it back to the nfl, why would he all of a sudden slip up?

This is quite outrageous. Tested clean 200 times since 2011 and then gets one positive and due to rules which only a 5 year old could make up, is now condemned to an NFL life-sentence, his life taken away from him? He was making the league minimum despite being a pro bowl CORNER, now when his pay day comes he is going to completely miss out because of this 1 test and rules that no sane man would defend? Where does any of this make sense to anyone?

And the worst part of all is the Seahawk fan reaction. I could expect this type of 'throw BB under the bus because i don't want the media to say mean things about me' type of attitude from enemies of the man, perhaps 49ers fans or the media themselves. But from Seahawk fans to treat BB like this is amazing to me. You don't even know the story yet, and you've already thrown him overboard. Great fans we have here in Seahawk country.

 

[Laloosh]

So if Browner gets off on a technicality like Sherman, can we stop saying the league hates Seattle?

Is it a technicality?

Feel free to elaborate on that one. We're all just talking about hypotheticals here because we don't actually have the facts but if Browner's story is true, please let us know how it's a technicality if his argument that he was a non-roster player is accurate? He was not active for a regular season game for more than the required six weeks to be taking completely out of the program.

At what point does it become mishandling their own rules (terrible rules btw) rather than a technicality?

 

[plyka]

For the league, this just shows incompetence in how the system is managed. From this incident questions arise about how one is promoted through the drug testing stages and whether they need to revisit them and clean up the process. For Browner however the tragedy is that whether he thought he was still in stage 1 or stage X, after 200 clean tests since 2011 how could he allow himself to slip?

The League may re-evaluate the suspension but then again they probably will not. Even if they do, Browner cost himself and his family an opportunity to create a comfortable future for them all. I am hoping for the best for him because we all make mistakes but I don't see this coming out roses for his career. He helped turn around the soft image Seattle had as a team, for that I am thankful.

What? How could he allow himself to slip up .05% of the time? Well, it's called, shit happens. What if he was in a car with an old friend while the old friend lit up a cig that had some weed mixed in? What if he was using an electronic cigarrete from a friend, who had previously used it for smoking Marijuana oil, and some got mixed in? What if he was walking on the sidewalk, and someone blew it in his face? What if he is at a party and accidentally had a brownie which had weed baked in? What if he is drinking pop at a party and some guy mixed in weed pop as a joke? There could literally be a thousand reasons how it could "just happen" .05% of the time.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Some technicality. He should never have been in that program in the first place. And to expect a person to keep testing when they're not even in the league is asinine.

Why shouldn't he have been in the program in the first place? Browner didn't get put in the program in 2005 for no reason, he obviously got caught for something.

I get what his lawyers are saying, he SHOULD have been notified. But that doesn't take away the fact that he violated the illegal substance rule.

I could be wrong but my understanding is that he entered that program voluntarily as a way of boosting his draft stock. Either way he should have been in stage 1 and with the amount of passed tests completely out of the program regardless of the fact that he was in the CFL for 5 years which should have also made it all moot.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

It's a "technicality" in the same sense as it was with Sherman - an outside agency bungled its own procedures.

But I'm fine with it, because the more I read about the drug program, the more utterly one-sided it sounds in favor of the league. At the very least, this fiasco is going to shine a giant spotlight on the structure and language of NFL player contracts in regards to the drug policy.

 

[hawk45]

"@_BVM: Browner was advanced to Stage 3 of the substance abuse policy for missing tests while in the CFL 5 years. Tested clean 200 times since 2011."

There's gotta be something more to this. After fighting so hard to make it back to the nfl, why would he all of a sudden slip up?

This is quite outrageous. Tested clean 200 times since 2011 and then gets one positive and due to rules which only a 5 year old could make up, is now condemned to an NFL life-sentence, his life taken away from him? He was making the league minimum despite being a pro bowl CORNER, now when his pay day comes he is going to completely miss out because of this 1 test and rules that no sane man would defend? Where does any of this make sense to anyone?

And the worst part of all is the Seahawk fan reaction. I could expect this type of 'throw BB under the bus because i don't want the media to say mean things about me' type of attitude from enemies of the man, perhaps 49ers fans or the media themselves. But from Seahawk fans to treat BB like this is amazing to me. You don't even know the story yet, and you've already thrown him overboard. Great fans we have here in Seahawk country.

Sounded to me like the Glove was thinking Browner maybe did *not* slip up and that something fishy is going on.

The overwhelming majority of posts in this thread haven't been discussing anything but the facts that are being dribbled out and what they mean to BB and how bad the NFL sucks.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

So if Browner gets off on a technicality like Sherman, can we stop saying the league hates Seattle?

Is it a technicality?

Feel free to elaborate on that one. We're all just talking about hypotheticals here because we don't actually have the facts but if Browner's story is true, please let us know how it's a technicality if his argument that he was a non-roster player is accurate? He was not active for a regular season game for more than the required six weeks to be taking completely out of the program.

At what point does it become mishandling their own rules (terrible rules btw) rather than a technicality?

Isn't that what a technicality is? Guilty but not punishable because the offense was mishandled?

Obviously the league wouldn't be trying to suspend Browner for a year if this wasn't his 3rd offense. So that tells us he did SOMETHING in 2005. But because the first offense isn't made public (like Thurmond's wasn't), no one knew about 2005 until now.

 

[BocciHawk]

Yeah, not a technicality.

One can argue if the rules are stupid or not (they're stupid) or reasonable or not (they are unreasonable) but if you just look at the actual rules, the NFL failed on many levels.

They failed to notify the Seahawks of what phase BB was in before he was signed, this is a big one actually, as it points to the NFL being totally confused and incompetent. NFL teams expect the league to notify them of these things timely so they don't give big contracts to people without knowing what kinds of things might happen if there are violations.

They failed to notify Browner of the missed tests.

They failed to count weeks and years properly, it sounds like he's been clean for two seasons plus, no violations the entire time he's been with the Seahawks, so he should have been reset to phase one.

They took tests of BB that were excessive and wrong and probably violated his privacy i.e. if he was phase one, they get one test a year, between April and August, and it's pretty clear the failed test came more recently and they were testing him as if he was phase three, which he was in error.

None of this is technicality.

I also think it's almost certainly illegal and wrong for them to attempt to hold BB to a CBA when he is employed by someone else and not even part of the union anymore. His time in Canada and out of the NFL should absolutely count to reset him to phase one. His time with the Seahawks the last couple of years should reset him to phase one. The positive test should have never happened.

The stuff with NFL.com leaking information is a violation of federal employment law and is also libel and slander. It also makes the NFL look bad. Silver was also wrong about Winfield. The NFL should not have an anti trust exemption and own NFL.com and NFL Network and run NFL Mobile for phones and so on. If the NFL is just an organization that helps the 32 teams coordinate then anti trust makes sense given that the players have a union. If the NFL is a vertically integrated conglomerate then it should be subject to all the same laws of any other huge for profit corporation.

If I was the NFL, I'd attempt to save face. I'd announce a four game suspension, but date it starting when the test was revealed i.e. give BB credit for time served, he was injured anyway. I'd also agree to put him in phase one, quietly, and hope that doesn't leak. If I was BB, I'd accept that as a compromise, probably. He could make a crapload out of suing Silver and making him give up his sources, given that he's an NFL employee writing on an NFL web site, there's no way he'd be allowed to protect his sources, and that would truly screw the NFL.

 

[Laloosh]

So if Browner gets off on a technicality like Sherman, can we stop saying the league hates Seattle?

Is it a technicality?

Feel free to elaborate on that one. We're all just talking about hypotheticals here because we don't actually have the facts but if Browner's story is true, please let us know how it's a technicality if his argument that he was a non-roster player is accurate? He was not active for a regular season game for more than the required six weeks to be taking completely out of the program.

At what point does it become mishandling their own rules (terrible rules btw) rather than a technicality?

Isn't that what a technicality is? Guilty but not punishable because the offense was mishandled?

Obviously the league wouldn't be trying to suspend Browner for a year if this wasn't his 3rd offense. So that tells us he did SOMETHING in 2005. But because the first offense isn't made public (like Thurmond's wasn't), no one knew about 2005 until now.

If a cop shoots someone while standing next to you and then arrests you for the crime but you're acquitted immediately because you were never read your rights, you'd be talking about the same kind of technicality. It's lunacy (if true) that he's even in stage 3 of the program... lunacy!

 

[-The Glove-]

"@_BVM: Browner was advanced to Stage 3 of the substance abuse policy for missing tests while in the CFL 5 years. Tested clean 200 times since 2011."

There's gotta be something more to this. After fighting so hard to make it back to the nfl, why would he all of a sudden slip up?

This is quite outrageous. Tested clean 200 times since 2011 and then gets one positive and due to rules which only a 5 year old could make up, is now condemned to an NFL life-sentence, his life taken away from him? He was making the league minimum despite being a pro bowl CORNER, now when his pay day comes he is going to completely miss out because of this 1 test and rules that no sane man would defend? Where does any of this make sense to anyone?

And the worst part of all is the Seahawk fan reaction. I could expect this type of 'throw BB under the bus because i don't want the media to say mean things about me' type of attitude from enemies of the man, perhaps 49ers fans or the media themselves. But from Seahawk fans to treat BB like this is amazing to me. You don't even know the story yet, and you've already thrown him overboard. Great fans we have here in Seahawk country.

Sounded to me like the Glove was thinking Browner maybe did *not* slip up and that something fishy is going on.

The overwhelming majority of posts in this thread haven't been discussing anything but the facts that are being dribbled out and what they mean to BB and how bad the NFL sucks.

Exactly what I was thinking. Browner himself said he is afraid to even touch beer because he's so worried about the tests. Until it's definitive that he tested positive I'm gonna keep my pitchfork in the closet.

 

[CANHawk]

This is quite outrageous. Tested clean 200 times since 2011 and then gets one positive and due to rules which only a 5 year old could make up, is now condemned to an NFL life-sentence, his life taken away from him? He was making the league minimum despite being a pro bowl CORNER, now when his pay day comes he is going to completely miss out because of this 1 test and rules that no sane man would defend? Where does any of this make sense to anyone?

And the worst part of all is the Seahawk fan reaction. I could expect this type of 'throw BB under the bus because i don't want the media to say mean things about me' type of attitude from enemies of the man, perhaps 49ers fans or the media themselves. But from Seahawk fans to treat BB like this is amazing to me. You don't even know the story yet, and you've already thrown him overboard. Great fans we have here in Seahawk country.

I think this marks the very first time I have ever whole heartedly agreed with something you've said Plyka... It's a Festivus miracle!!!

But yeah... a THOUSAND times THIS! The speed at which many people turned their back on BB because of some bullshit, pious "moral outrage" is truly pathetic. Browner did how many amazing things for us and directly contributed to winning how many games, yet we're ready to throw him out in the cold because he failed some bullshit league rules? Because he's somehow not one of the good little boyscouts you want on our team? Incredibly lame.

BB didn't shoot nobody, BB didn't beat up any ladies, BB isn't a gangbanger, BB didn't get all shitfaced and drive around town. He had some marijuana in his system, that really could have come from just about anywhere (walk through a room where it's being smoked, or unknowingly take a bite of a little special cookie). BB's a hard worker who's overcome some great adversity to be where he is and has been a HUGE contributing factor to the MONUMENTAL cluture shift that has occurred here.......... yet we're going to throw him under the bus.

Screw that. #FREEBROWNER