Twitter: Update from Randy Gregory himself

MyFairLady

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,373
Reaction score
6,517
Randy would be a hall of famer if it wasn't for everyone else but him.
 

BigStar

Stop chasing
Messages
11,524
Reaction score
17,078
anyone still waiting on Gregory is what we with some street smarts call a fool and a mark.
hqdefault.jpg
 

BigStar

Stop chasing
Messages
11,524
Reaction score
17,078
Gee it used to be you could just get arrested for DWI, driving while intoxicated but now you can also get arrested for DUI, driving while under the influence of drugs including weed. We see ads all the time on TV about not drinking and driving and use a designated driver, but to tell people that they should not have a beer because you have a problem with players who got suspended repeatedly for using weed is foolish at best. If people do drive while drunk or on weed and get caught they pay the price.

Lets look at the entire weed issue prior to the new CBA. The first failed drug test the player got a fine and was ordered into the random drug testing program for 2 years that went on all year not just during the season. If he failed a test again he got a 4 game suspension and the drug test program was exteded to be for 5 years. If he failed another test he was suspended for 10 games and another failure was for an undetermined length that could be end up being for life and that is where Gregory is at. The new CBA DOES NOT wipe away ANY suspension that has handed down prior to this new CBA only how they are handle from now on. Gregory failed his first drug test before he was even drafted and that wasn't held against him when he was drafted. So it boils down to he used up 5 strikes other than old saying of 3 strikes and your out.
.
.
A fancy way of saying we were wrong, but will hold you to that dated standard...mainly just because we can? 5 strikes for a rule that no longer exists because it never really should have?

Does admitting "fault by way of reinstatement" take anything away from those suspensions he served? Just a far fetched hypothetical, if he goes on a tear, would the league want him promoted for Comeback player of the year ;)

All new players won't be suspended for weed, but see you're not new...got ya? That is ridiculously stupid. Really just a spiteful way to get back at someone. Sounds like...
 
Last edited:

jterrell

Penguinite
Messages
33,428
Reaction score
15,603
to me this says what we've all probably known:
The NFL and Gregory's team/agent have been going back and forth with paperwork.
Requests for documents or additional testing.
The delayed ruling is a sign of that.

but it also says, Gregory wants to play and is willing to put public pressure on the Commish to get a ruling.
 

MyFairLady

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,373
Reaction score
6,517
I have never known anyone who wanted to get paid for football but not play football more than Randy Gregory. He is textbook. I have never once heard him take ownership for anything and we drafted him about 14 years ago now.
 

Jfconrow

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,269
Reaction score
672
This is the worst part about football nowadays, these things that have nothing to do with football.
 

Whyjerry

Well-Known Member
Messages
15,947
Reaction score
24,810
Go on...what you’re claiming is nothing but a myth. I can think of two cases, zeke and brown, to help support your bogus accusation and I have many more examples to prove you wrong.

Let’s dance, whatchya got?

Huh?
 

JayFord

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,526
Reaction score
21,218
I would’ve done the same thing

I understand the guy has made a mistake i get that. But cmon now, dont let the guy stay in limbo......

suspend me for the season fine but give me a return date like week 7 of next year

Its really unprofessional on the leagues part
 

gjkoeppen

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,703
Reaction score
3,327
A fancy way of saying we were wrong, but will hold you to that dated standard...mainly just because we can? 5 strikes for a rule that no longer exists because it never really should have?

Does admitting "fault by way of reinstatement" take anything away from those suspensions he served? Just a far fetched hypothetical, if he goes on a tear, would the league want him promoted for Comeback player of the year ;)

All new players won't be suspended for weed, but see you're not new...got ya? That is ridiculously stupid. Really just a spiteful way to get back at someone. Sounds like...




I see you're another one that thinks you can decide what rules should be enforced and which ones shouldn't. Whether you or anyone else doesn't like what the drug testing was like and punishment was given out prior to the current CBA, it was the rules then and EVERY player knew what they were. The current CBA does not wash away any suspension for drugs that was given prior to this CBA being signed. THOSE ARE THE RULES, but you think that's a rule you can just ignore because you don't like it. For some reason you think that professional athletes shouldn't have to worry about the consequences that regular people have to face in the real world. Most companies today require a drug test as a condition of being hired. Failing it results in not getting hired. Many of those same companies have annual or random test also. I worked for a company that I had to do the drug test to get hired and then either the month before, the month of or the month after the anniversary I was hired I got my notice to go do my drug test. All the employees know that a failed test can and did result in their termination. They have a zero tolerance for drug test failure.

Again you don't want anyone to follow the rules that you don't like You think that the progressive punishment for players to break the rules they knew about was wrong. The strikes shouldn't have been counted. Here's what you just don't get. Gregory is still sitting out there because he couldn't or wouldn't follow the rules at the time. So now they may be saying that Gregory couldn't comply with that rule and was a repeated offender so what makes us think that if reinstated he decides he needs PED's to be able to compete and this still can be suspended in this CBA. They are taking into consideration his history of not following the rules repeatedly. It's rules not necessarily that rule.

I could be wrong but I doubt that even if Gregory was reinstated and had a really good season that he would get honored for that season because he miss all those games because of multiple suspensions. That would be awarding him for repeatedly breaking league rules. Maybe in your mind were you think there shouldn't have been suspensions for smoking weed that makes sense, but I don't see it.
.
.
 

gjkoeppen

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,703
Reaction score
3,327
I would’ve done the same thing

I understand the guy has made a mistake i get that. But cmon now, dont let the guy stay in limbo......

suspend me for the season fine but give me a return date like week 7 of next year

Its really unprofessional on the leagues part



He's on an indefinite suspension. That means there is no pre-subscribed time for a return. It's when the league decided to do it if they do.
.
.
 

BigStar

Stop chasing
Messages
11,524
Reaction score
17,078
I see you're another one that thinks you can decide what rules should be enforced and which ones shouldn't. Whether you or anyone else doesn't like what the drug testing was like and punishment was given out prior to the current CBA, it was the rules then and EVERY player knew what they were. The current CBA does not wash away any suspension for drugs that was given prior to this CBA being signed. THOSE ARE THE RULES, but you think that's a rule you can just ignore because you don't like it. For some reason you think that professional athletes shouldn't have to worry about the consequences that regular people have to face in the real world. Most companies today require a drug test as a condition of being hired. Failing it results in not getting hired. Many of those same companies have annual or random test also. I worked for a company that I had to do the drug test to get hired and then either the month before, the month of or the month after the anniversary I was hired I got my notice to go do my drug test. All the employees know that a failed test can and did result in their termination. They have a zero tolerance for drug test failure.

Again you don't want anyone to follow the rules that you don't like You think that the progressive punishment for players to break the rules they knew about was wrong. The strikes shouldn't have been counted. Here's what you just don't get. Gregory is still sitting out there because he couldn't or wouldn't follow the rules at the time. So now they may be saying that Gregory couldn't comply with that rule and was a repeated offender so what makes us think that if reinstated he decides he needs PED's to be able to compete and this still can be suspended in this CBA. They are taking into consideration his history of not following the rules repeatedly. It's rules not necessarily that rule.

I could be wrong but I doubt that even if Gregory was reinstated and had a really good season that he would get honored for that season because he miss all those games because of multiple suspensions. That would be awarding him for repeatedly breaking league rules. Maybe in your mind were you think there shouldn't have been suspensions for smoking weed that makes sense, but I don't see it.
.
.
Agree to disagree on this topic. When a rule doesn't make any sense, it's hard to give it credibility. When rules follow a logical application, they are generally respected and adhered to. You prefer the umbrella, well it's in the rule book, doesn't have to make sense.

We used to have laws outlawing alcohol until we realized that rule doesn't make any sense. Now we are doing the same for weed but you want to punish those before the law or policy has changed? "Because you can" is not a great argument either...
 
Last edited:

cern

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,900
Reaction score
21,050
we know he's getting better when he finally sees himself as the victim. next comes the self righteous indignation. the man has penance done. and penance more will do..........................the ancient mariner.
 

CouchCoach

Staff member
Messages
41,122
Reaction score
74,900
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
If the NFL has decided that smoking weed is no longer an infraction worthy of suspension, then I do not get the issue with this now.

When laws get changed, that is an open admission that the law was wrong. The fact that someone committed that while it was law shouldn't matter. When states began changing their laws concerning this, they released the people from prison serving time for that.

It doesn't really matter how many times Gregory or Gordon regressed into that behavior, that is no longer considered behavior worthy of detention.

Yep, he blew 4 chances but that has little to do with today when that is no longer considered a crime.

What I don't agree with is that he's being singled out because he's a Cowboy. What I do agree with is that this owner pushes it further than any other and I think Goodell is still pissed at him over that Hardy deal. He wanted that animal out of the league and he ends up on the most covered team. And therein lies the problem, the Cowboys are the media magnet so transgressions get magnified and there are just too many bad boys. So, while I do not agree that he's not reinstated because he's a Cowboy, he's not getting any favors because of it either.
 

zrinkill

Cowboy Fan
Messages
46,290
Reaction score
26,404
Do not believe a word this clown says.

I remember his promise that the Cowboys would never have to worry about him after he was drafted.
 

gjkoeppen

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,703
Reaction score
3,327
Agree to disagree on this topic. When a rule doesn't make any sense, it's hard to give it credibility. When rules follow a logical application, they are generally respected and adhered to. You prefer the umbrella, well it's in the rule book, doesn't have to make sense.

We used to have laws outlawing alcohol until we realized that rule doesn't make any sense. Now we are doing the same for weed but you want to punish those before the law or policy has changed? "Because you can" is not a great argument either...




Again you want to dictate what rules should be followed. I'm not sure how you were raised but I was raised to follow the rules, even the ones I didn't agree with. The current CBA isn't retroactive back to any date, it's from the time it was signed going forward for the duration of the CBA. All of the suspensions that were enforced at the signing of the current CBA are decided by the rules that were used at the time of the suspension.

Yes there was prohibition that was changed and the laws on weed have been relaxed but by your logic every person in jail or prison on weed charges should automatically be released just because they changed the law going forward and they're not being released. Same thing with the current CBA and prior suspensions.
.
.
 
Top