Browners Case

[WizardHawk]

Report: Browner unlikely to get yearlong suspension - Seattle Seattle Seahawks | Examiner.com

Seahawks cornerback Brandon Browner is believed to have turned down a deal offered by the NFL as he seeks a fine and no lost games, John Clayton reported on 710 ESPN on Tuesday, and Clayton says Browner is unlikely to face the yearlong suspension the NFL originally planned to levy for what appears to be his first positive test for substance abuse.

Maybe things are starting to look up for us.

 

[ErrDayI'mRusselin']

What the heck made them change their minds?

Good find btw!!!

 

[Cloud]

So there was a deal? What was the NFL trying to deal with? This case is getting stranger by the days and it look like Browner actually have a real fighting chance here.

What is the NFL trying to accomplish?

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Just remember that the first time Browner enter the drug program, it wasn't because he failed a test, but rather to get help for his problem. So should that count as strike one?

 

[WizardHawk]

According to that article this was his first positive test for substance abuse and that's the crux of his argument against the league.

 

[Cloud]

According to that article this was his first positive test for substance abuse and that's the crux of his argument against the league.

So my guess is the NFL policies need to be interpret better. From what I read and understand, the Non-PED and PED policies while are separate, they both fall under the same structure. Because of that, my interpretation of why BB could face a year long ban was apparently wrong based on what the NFL was saying if BB come out on top of this.

Either way, the NFL need to interpret this better. I don't blame Browner though because he is fighting for his playing career here.

 

[Cloud]

Just remember that the first time Browner enter the drug program, it wasn't because he failed a test, but rather to get help for his problem. So should that count as strike one?

I don't think that should count as strike 1 if he entered the program voluntarily. I think this is probably his basis for fighting if the NFL lay down the one year hammer.

 

[ErrDayI'mRusselin']

Wouldn't he be on strike 2 then? And should only be suspended 4 games?

 

[dude82]

This whole thing is too confusing, so I give up on trying to follow it. If he plays again this year (in other words, comes back from his injury and doesn't have to serve a suspension) I'll root for him to do well. If he doesn't, I'll wish him luck wherever he ends up next year, but won't miss him too much if he ends up somewhere else next year. The Hawks proved last night that they can hold down one of the best passing offenses of the last decade without him and without Thurmond. If they maintain their status as the #1 pass defense in the league while both of those guys are out, there's not a whole lot of incentive to bring them back and pay them more next year if they can keep the guys they have and draft new guys to take those spots.

 

[Cloud]

Wouldn't he be on strike 2 then? And should only be suspended 4 games?

Too confusing.. oh well, who cares, let see how it plays out. In the meantime, got better things to look forward to.

 

[dude82]

Wouldn't he be on strike 2 then? And should only be suspended 4 games?

You'd think, but he got the 4-game suspension last year already and if what he's supposedly claiming now was true when he got that suspension, it'd be hard for me to see the league giving him the benefit of the doubt now. At this point, it wouldn't surprise me if they recognized that they botched it last year and either cut the would-be year-long suspension in half or give him another 4-gamer. Either way, it's a giant mess and something that they need to get sorted out so it doesn't happen that way again.

 

[WizardHawk]

What John Clayton was reporting on is Browner was considered in the program when he sought help while with the Broncos. After he left for the CFL he was still supposed to keep up on substance testing under the rules, whether playing for an NFL team or not. He failed to do so and was moved to stage 3 for not taking his required testing. He then recently failed a substance test while he was in stage 3.

If what he is saying is true, the PED and substance stages are separate. He did fail a PED and got his 4 games, but this is entirely about his refusal (more like neglect because he wasn't in the league and had no reason to believe he would return) and then failing just one test after he returned.

He is willing to push this all the way to litigation because had he not been in stage 3 for nothing more than leaving the league for a few years he wouldn't have had any games suspended because he wouldn't have even been in stage 1.

This is likely why Seattle hasn't done more to get replacements. Thurmond will be back before the Rams game and there is a significant chance Browner will be as well.

 

[Cloud]

So the NFL moved him to stage 3 because he was in the CFL for a while. That's kind of unfair because once you're in that stage, you never get out. I can see why he's fighting this potential ban.

The question still remained whether or not Browner was made aware he's in stage 3 because if he knew about it, it was still inexcusable to put himself in this situation. If he didn't know about it, the NFL is partially at fault.

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

Yeah they can't hold him to that if he was in the CFL.. That's ridiculous… NFL needs to back off on that one…

 

[seattlefan75]

well this is good news how long before he comes back from injury assuming he doesnt get suspended? i herd pete said that he might practice today

 

[ErrDayI'mRusselin']

But how does he go from a year long suspension........to NO suspension......MAKES NO FUCKING SENSE! The NFL is retarded with their rules........it does not seem that the even have a rule if you move from one league to another and if you are on the list of players suspended for PED's or non PED's.......Roger is a fucking little man with power!

 

[AintNoSaint]

IMO....what this all boils down to, is that the NFL screwed the pooch on it's own rules. As it now has it's legal tit in a ringer, it's got to do some effin serious back-peddling, as I'm sure the Browner case isn't unique in that it's probably already occurred w/ someone else. The NFL fucked up...and they know it. Your service Mr. Goodell....

 

[Cloud]

I think it's looking like that's the case.

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

Brandon Browner reportedly rejected NFL deal, seeking to have suspension reduced to a fine - Field Gulls

 

[Cloud]

So the NFL did not let him know that he still needed to comply with the testings despite being out of the league. FAIL on their part.

Browner does not deserve a one year ban. If we can get him back for the playoffs, it is going to be huge.

200 tests since 2011.... that is mind boggling.