Gregory update

Assuming the rumor is true that he missed a test, might be some independently-verifiable and extenuating circumstances that caused it that could weigh heavily in favor of a reduced verdict... and/or, that he made up for the missed test within such a short amount of time, it is ridiculous to presume there was something in his system that disappeared within the number of hours between... and/or, that he submitted to a blood test shortly after the missed appt, the results of which, unlike a urine test, are practically impossible to dispute.

Lots of room for appeal, regardless, depending on the details of the situation.

Not likely. If you're at the point where you're facing a year-long suspension, it's because you've either failed multiple test and/or failed to comply (e.g. show up for a test, refuse to provide a sample).

Here's a refresher on the NFL drug/suspension program: http://www.behindthesteelcurtain.co...tance-abuse-policies-martavis-bryant-steelers

NFL Policies Concerning Substances
If Fowler is right and Bryant's drug of choice was marijuana, his infraction falls under the substance abuse policy. The NFL's current policy on substance abuse includes improper use of prescription drugs, over-the-counter drugs, illegal drugs, and alcohol. The agreement prohibits the use, possession, and distribution of drugs such as cocaine, marijuana, opiates and opiods, MDMA, and PCP. Amphetamines also fall under this policy unless the player has a legitimate documented, legitimate need to treat a medical condition.

Testing Schedule
For both kinds of substances, players can also be disciplined for refusing to test, failing to test, or manipulating the specimen.

Under the substance abuse policy, players are tested:

  • Before they are hired with a new team. This includes testing of draft-eligible players at the scouting combines.
  • Preseason at least once between April 20 and August 9.
  • At regular, pre-determined intervals if a player is in an intervention program.
  • By agreement if the NFL team and the player agree to it as part of his contract and if there is a reason to request such testing.
Intervention Program
The intervention program is for players who have failed a drug test, have questionable behavior (arrests or psychological signs of substance abuse), or refer themselves. The intervention program has three stages.

Stage One
The medical director evaluates a player and comes up with a treatment plan for him at which point the player receives treatment through a clinician or facility. The player agrees to release information about his progress to the medical director. He is also subject to substance abuse testing.

A player can be in Stage One for up to 90 days. If stage one is completed successfully, the player is discharged. If not, he moves on to Stage Two. The "if not" usually includes failed tests or noncompliance in treatment.
Violations during Stage One result in a fine.

Stage Two
Stage Two lasts for 24 months or two full seasons and is similar to Stage One in terms of the treatment plan, testing, and violation. During this stage, however, consequences are more severe. In addition to a fine, players with infractions during Stage Two face a four-game suspension.
Subsequent infractions result in a suspension of four to six games. These players also advance to Stage Three.
Players who complete Stage Two are discharged from the program and start over at Stage One if they have another violation, just like first-time offenders.

Stage Three
Stage Three, like the other two stages, involves complying with a treatment plan and submitting to unannounced drug tests. The consequences for violations during Stage Three are much more severe: The player faces a year-long ban from the NFL. If the first violation in Stage Three is for marijuana, the player receives a 10-game suspension instead of a year-long ban.

Interestingly, the NFL commissioner is in charge of reinstating players after their one-year bans.
Stage Three players can expect to stay at this level for the rest of their careers unless they are discharged at the discretion of the medical director.

Alcohol & Breaking the Law
Casual alcohol use is not prohibited unless it is part of a player's treatment plan.
Alcohol-related violations fall under the substance abuse policy when the player has broken the law. The first violation results in a two-game suspension, while subsequent violations result in an eight-game suspension. If a player breaks the law while under the influence of other substances, he will face a four-game suspension for the first infraction and then up to a 10-game suspension for subsequent infractions.

Confidentiality
The reason the public doesn't hear about infractions until a suspension is announced is because of rules about confidentiality. Particularly in Stage One, where the only consequences are fines, there is no reason the public would ever know about the infraction. In fact, there are $500,000 fines for people who violate a player's confidentiality when it comes to information about his diagnosis, treatment, test results and participation in the program.

Changes in New Policy
This drug policy is relatively new. Under this CBA, punishments are more harsh for DUIs, while some punishments for marijuana use are lower (e.g. in Stage Three the first infraction for marijuana is now 10 games instead of a year). Also significant, player appeals of drug-related punishments are heard by a neutral arbitrator, not the Commissioner.
 
Most coaches I have been around are never happy. That doesn't tell me much except that they are demanding and pushy.

Can't imagine anyone being happy with Gregory who failed three drug tests before his second season. He's done ZERO on the field and has been nothing but a headache.
 
I actually don't get that "fed up" impression. At all. We've seen Red's "fed up" face and heard his "fed up" talk... rewind the Greg Hardy, and to a lesser degree, the Rolando McClain tapes.

I think he's just being matter-of-fact and objective... I sense he respects how Gregory has shown up and continues to work hard.

He didn't sound real pleased as training camp was opening saying we're going to move on from some players and Gregory had to be one of those players he was referring to. Jerry is the one who doesn't want to give up on Gregory. He simply can't be counted on and I don't expect him back next season.
 
Read it, CalPoly.

And even assuming all of that is accurate (I have no reason to doubt, except for my natural inclination to be cautious when blog sites are used for accurate info)... I don't get the "not likely" assertion you make.

The difference seems to be that you imagine a scenario where Gregory refused to give a sample... and okay, but that just gets back to the point that we don't know the details, and that's one example of a detail we don't know.
 
He didn't sound real pleased as training camp was opening saying we're going to move on from some players and Gregory had to be one of those players he was referring to. Jerry is the one who doesn't want to give up on Gregory. He simply can't be counted on and I don't expect him back next season.

We just disagree. That's an assumption I don't make. You could be right, but you could be wrong.

Also... Jerry's got plenty of company, it seems, based on interviews in the last 24 hours we've been reading and listening to... and they play defense.
 
The time until his hearing will be inversely proportional to his success on the field over the next two games.

I said the same thing in another thread...lol. Lights the world on fire, suspended again. Play beh...Mid February decision.
 
We just disagree. That's an assumption I don't make. You could be right, but you could be wrong.

Garrett did say "players" and the assumption was he was referring to Ro and Gregory. Who else could it have been? Moving on from some players isn't a comment a head coach usually makes at the opening of training camp if they're not a little peeved about something. He certainly didn't have a pleased look on his face when he made that comment.
 
He's not going to give his true feelings on Gregory but he can't be pleased with him, he's let the team and the organization down repeatedly. Jerry is the one still trying to save face over the pick. He still claims Gregory has a future here. lol Garrett was the one prior to camp saying we're going to move on from some players and Gregory had to be one of the players he was referring to but everyone knows that's up to Jerry who we move on from.

I think his answer was directed at Rolando and Garrett was inclusive concerning the team as to not single any body out publicly.

I think in his mind the answer really was singular. Not plural.

Rolando.
 
I think his answer was directed at Rolando and Garrett was inclusive concerning the team as to not single any body out publicly.

I think in his mind the answer really was singular. Not plural.

Rolando.

He used the word "players" and Gregory and Ro were the names that everyone speculated on even some in the media. Don't see how the Cowboys can go forward with Gregory and depend on him after three failed drug tests.
 
Well it is a good thing reality is not limited by what you can imagine.

If you think the organization is going to feel comfortable they can count on Gregory as part of their future that's your opinion. If I'm in their shoes I'm not going forward next season with a player who's done nothing on the field and has had three failed drug tests in a year. You can't have a player taking up a roster spot who fills an important position who could end up failing another drug test and be suspended again. The guy can't be counted on.
 
Read it, CalPoly.

And even assuming all of that is accurate (I have no reason to doubt, except for my natural inclination to be cautious when blog sites are used for accurate info)... I don't get the "not likely" assertion you make.

The difference seems to be that you imagine a scenario where Gregory refused to give a sample... and okay, but that just gets back to the point that we don't know the details, and that's one example of a detail we don't know.

I'm not assuming he missed a test date because it's really irrelevant whether he missed a test or failed one. What I'm saying is if he's at the point that he's facing a year long suspension, it means he's either failed and/or missed multiple tests. I could be reading what you wrote wrong in the post I referenced initially, but it sounds like to me you're hoping Gregory's impending status can be improved through some loop hole or technicality.
 
He used the word "players" and Gregory and Ro were the names that everyone speculated on even some in the media. Don't see how the Cowboys can go forward with Gregory and depend on him after three failed drug tests.
I know that and explained.


My two cents..............just like yours.
 
It would make some sense that Red would have been purposeful in using "players" rather than "player," so as not to verbally poke McClain in the chest, which would have been the obvious conclusion to be reached had he said "player."

Then again, in training camp, wouldn't he be accurate to say "moving on" from "players" anyhow?... I mean, there are several players at that stage being "moved on" from.

And where did things lie with Hardy at that point you're quoting him... I recall some still thinking we might pursue him in FA still yet for some time.
 
If you think the organization is going to feel comfortable they can count on Gregory as part of their future that's your opinion. If I'm in their shoes I'm not going forward next season with a player who's done nothing on the field and has had three failed drug tests in a year. You can't have a player taking up a roster spot who fills an important position who could end up failing another drug test and be suspended again. The guy can't be counted on.

Now you are equivocating.

You don't know what they think. It's okay.
 
He didn't sound real pleased as training camp was opening saying we're going to move on from some players and Gregory had to be one of those players he was referring to. Jerry is the one who doesn't want to give up on Gregory. He simply can't be counted on and I don't expect him back next season.

Considering that Gregory had and has a locker at the training complex, and did when it was built, I don't think you are correct here.

Garrett was likely referring to McClain, who doesn't have a locker at The Star, and Greg Hardy.
 
I'm not assuming he missed a test date because it's really irrelevant whether he missed a test or failed one. What I'm saying is if he's at the point that he's facing a year long suspension, it means he's either failed and/or missed multiple tests. I could be reading what you wrote wrong in the post I referenced initially, but it sounds like to me you're hoping Gregory's impending status can be improved through some loop hole or technicality.

Something is getting lost in the translation here.

For a third offense, by definition, yes, there are "multiple" offenses accumulated.

But the third offense itself is, ostensibly, a single incident.

And that single incident... it's been rumored... was a matter of failing to show-up for a test. And all I'm saying is... there IS an appeal process, obviously, and seemingly, that appeal process might have some basis... and I'm only setting forward some ways in which the details of the situation might be indicative of a successful appeal, or at least, one that reduces the penalty.
 
12 games, 7 tackles no sacks. I think he played well in the opener and that was it, then he has another long boring offseason to not smoke weed. I guess I'm just not very excited about what he can bring..I doubt he gets much playing time anyway
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
474,017
Messages
14,506,910
Members
24,207
Latest member
TomGiantsfan
Back
Top