As a society we aren't nearly as concerned. But, this isn't society issuing the suspension. The NFL is, and it's using the CBA that every NFL player must abide by to suspend the player. Societal attitude has nothing to do with it.

Well, drug tests happen at most jobs so I disagree. They test for pot in Washington and Colorado. If society wasn't concerned it wouldn't be illegal in 48 states. Granted the momentum of change is happening, but it is surprising it has taken this long.

---

I understand and even agree with what you are saying. This is why I don't feel sorry for him. But seriously, why are we as a society so concerned about what people do in their personal lives?

The NFL wants to be considered a wholesome brand. They want to be able to say they create role models. For them, taking a stance against illegal drugs helps promote that image.

---

Well, drug tests happen at most jobs so I disagree. They test for pot in Washington and Colorado. If society wasn't concerned it wouldn't be illegal in 48 states. Granted the momentum of change is happening, but it is surprising it has taken this long.

Employers test.  Society doesn't.  If you opt to work for a company that does drug testing, you're accepting that fact.  You're not being forced to work for that company.  Societal views have nothing to do with it.  Laws and corporate policies do. 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Well, drug tests happen at most jobs so I disagree. They test for pot in Washington and Colorado. If society wasn't concerned it wouldn't be illegal in 48 states. Granted the momentum of change is happening, but it is surprising it has taken this long.

Even though society's view is shifting, there is still a large segment of the population that is anti-pot.

---

The NFL wants to be considered a wholesome brand. They want to be able to say they create role models. For them, taking a stance against illegal drugs helps promote that image.

Right, but this is most businesses and that pressure is coming from society. This is my point.

---

Even though society's view is shifting, there is still a large segment of the population that is anti-pot.

Yes, you are correct and part of my point or observation.

---

Right, but this is most businesses and that pressure is coming from society. This is my point.

They're not being pressured by society.  They're following the law in most states.  There are still companies in Colorado and California that drug test and will terminate employment for a positive result.  So, despite the softening of views as a society, there are still companies who hold true to the policies regardless. 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Yes, you are correct and part of my point or observation.

As long as that segment remains large and has deep pockets corporations and government will lean towards their side.

---

What the hell man.

 

Its already been established the Browns are committed to Mack. 

 

Sometimes I like some of your opposition, but you just came back from a temporary ban. 

 

 

Yeah, I say what the hell right back....

 

I see/ read this story and see that the Browns now are desperate for WR help. 

 

I see the Jaguars still desperate for OL help, primarily Center. 

 

So to make that happen I suggest a trade. 

 

....and because the most likely candidate for a trade happens to be someone who people don't want to see go (for whatever their reasons) they have to cry "troll" or "derail" when it is genuinely NOT either. 

 

The trade idea stems directly from the information released in the story, meaning If Gordon wasn't banned or banned for only a partial season, then there'd be no reason to suggest trading a WR to the Browns. 

 

Now, perhaps I am not offering enough in the deal, as maybe another mid round pick might have to bee added in addition to Shorts, but if it would get Mack here, I'd do it. Mack would provide the OL with the kind of stability that Mankins just gave Tampa's line. 

---

not shocking. its what should happen.

---

:thanks: Extra Life 2016 is 11/05/16 :thanks:

Yeah, I say what the hell right back....

 

I see/ read this story and see that the Browns now are desperate for WR help. 

 

I see the Jaguars still desperate for OL help, primarily Center. 

 

So to make that happen I suggest a trade. 

 

....and because the most likely candidate for a trade happens to be someone who people don't want to see go (for whatever their reasons) they have to cry "troll" or "derail" when it is genuinely NOT either. 

 

The trade idea stems directly from the information released in the story, meaning If Gordon wasn't banned or banned for only a partial season, then there'd be no reason to suggest trading a WR to the Browns. 

 

Now, perhaps I am not offering enough in the deal, as maybe another mid round pick might have to bee added in addition to Shorts, but if it would get Mack here, I'd do it. Mack would provide the OL with the kind of stability that Mankins just gave Tampa's line.

You and malabar also have to figure in the cap hit the brown would take due to any signing bonus Mack had. It all accelerates to NOW. That alone makes it very difficult if not completely impracticle.

---

You and malabar also have to figure in the cap hit the brown would take due to any signing bonus Mack had. It all accelerates to NOW. That alone makes it very difficult if not completely impracticle.

That shouldn't be taken into consideration when proposing an agenda driven trade. 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Yeah, I say what the hell right back....

 

I see/ read this story and see that the Browns now are desperate for WR help. 

 

I see the Jaguars still desperate for OL help, primarily Center. 

 

So to make that happen I suggest a trade. 

 

....and because the most likely candidate for a trade happens to be someone who people don't want to see go (for whatever their reasons) they have to cry "troll" or "derail" when it is genuinely NOT either. 

 

The trade idea stems directly from the information released in the story, meaning If Gordon wasn't banned or banned for only a partial season, then there'd be no reason to suggest trading a WR to the Browns. 

 

Now, perhaps I am not offering enough in the deal, as maybe another mid round pick might have to bee added in addition to Shorts, but if it would get Mack here, I'd do it. Mack would provide the OL with the kind of stability that Mankins just gave Tampa's line. 

It's a moot point. The CBA won't allow a trade between the jags and the browns for Mack until one year from the date they matched the offer we gave him.

---

It's a moot point. The CBA won't allow a trade between the jags and the browns for Mack until one year from the date they matched the offer we gave him.

Oh, that takes the air out of the diva's grand plan. 

 

Okay, so, who else on the Browns roster can we trade Shorts for? 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

That shouldn't be taken into consideration when proposing an agenda driven trade. 

 

Yawn, everything's an agenda with you. 

 

Wanting Mack on this team and solidifying the OL is my "agenda" here, but because Shorts is involved, you have to look for a reason to cry agenda. 

---

It's a moot point. The CBA won't allow a trade between the jags and the browns for Mack until one year from the date they matched the offer we gave him.

 

Well that part I was unaware of. I guess its similar to the NBA. 

 

Thats too bad, because we need OL help and they seemingly need WR help (and Shorts is from Cleveland area too) 

---

Yawn, everything's an agenda with you. 

 

Wanting Mack on this team and solidifying the OL is my "agenda" here, but because Shorts is involved, you have to look for a reason to cry agenda. 

 

Yeah, because I'm the one who can't stand Cecil Shorts, suggesting all sorts of ridiculous trade options to get rid of him.  Guilty!  I'm all about the agenda, princess. 

 

We took our shot at Mack.  It's over.  Deal with it.

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Yeah, I say what the hell right back....

 

I see/ read this story and see that the Browns now are desperate for WR help. 

 

I see the Jaguars still desperate for OL help, primarily Center. 

 

So to make that happen I suggest a trade. 

 

....and because the most likely candidate for a trade happens to be someone who people don't want to see go (for whatever their reasons) they have to cry "troll" or "derail" when it is genuinely NOT either. 

 

The trade idea stems directly from the information released in the story, meaning If Gordon wasn't banned or banned for only a partial season, then there'd be no reason to suggest trading a WR to the Browns. 

 

Now, perhaps I am not offering enough in the deal, as maybe another mid round pick might have to bee added in addition to Shorts, but if it would get Mack here, I'd do it. Mack would provide the OL with the kind of stability that Mankins just gave Tampa's line. 

 

so a team thats willing to give that kind of contract without hesitation at all to mack, possibly the best center in the game....is going to want to trade him for cecil shorts who you deem as the third or fourth best receiver on the jacksonville jaguars. (and possibly a third to fifth rounder as well.)

 

clearly thats the kind of idea that only a man with a powerhouse IQ and unwaivering creed would come up with.

 

they fumigating the bar you live in this week and you just refused to leave or something?

---

Coughlin when asked if winning will be a focus: "What the hell else is there? This is nice and dandy, but winning is what all this is about."

Well that part I was unaware of. I guess its similar to the NBA. 

 

Thats too bad, because we need OL help and they seemingly need WR help (and Shorts is from Cleveland area too) 

It's their policy on the right of first refusal. It applies to restricted free agents also.

 

It prevents a team from matching an offer just to price gouge the offering party.

---

Trade them Shorts for Mack

 

 If that happens,  this time the ' fans'  in the Dawg Pound will be throwing bottles at the Browns brass.

 

 The Browns need a go to WR much more than a complimentary WR.   They wouldn't even consider trading one of their 2 or 3 best players for anything less than a top flight WR or the equivalent.    It's not a knock on CSIII,  who is a good WR to have as part of an overall WR corp.

---