09-30-2016, 10:46 AM
You'll recall that, shortly before his original application for reinstatement date, news broke of another positive test. If it turned out to be true, he would have been facing a lifetime ban. But the league instead told him he couldn't apply until later in the summer so we can monitor you, and you'll serve additional games upon reinstatement but be allowed to stay with the team for the support structure.
This most recent event confirms, to me, the validity of that positive test story, and that the league was willing to bypass the lifetime ban because they felt his play deemed him too important to the bottom line of the Browns to banish him. If they REALLY want to help future players, they need to do what was agreed upon in the CBA and kick him out. Only when players see that no player is too good to avoid the punishments will young players really start to take it to heart.
This most recent event confirms, to me, the validity of that positive test story, and that the league was willing to bypass the lifetime ban because they felt his play deemed him too important to the bottom line of the Browns to banish him. If they REALLY want to help future players, they need to do what was agreed upon in the CBA and kick him out. Only when players see that no player is too good to avoid the punishments will young players really start to take it to heart.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
