Seahawks Insider

Morning Links: Browner saga comes to abrupt end

Post by Todd Dybas / The News Tribune on Dec. 19, 2013 at 12:33 am with 80 Comments »
December 19, 2013 12:33 am
Brandon Browner's NFL future is now in doubt. / AP photo
Brandon Browner’s NFL future is now in doubt. / AP photo

Good morning.

Brandon Browner’s season came to a swift end Wednesday when he was suspended indefinitely by the NFL.

Expect Browner, who will be an unrestricted free agent, to pursue some form of litigation as he tries to recoup money lost because of his suspension. His camp still believes that Browner was wrongfully moved into Stage 3 of the substance-abuse program and had been prepared to sue should Browner’s appeal of a one-year suspension be denied. It was, they will.

In regard to the roster, this has little impact. Browner had evolved into an extra since Walter Thurmond, Byron Maxwell and Jeremy Lane all showed they were very capable when on the field. Thurmond will be back from suspension next week.

Browner, now busted by the league three times during his career, will be a risk for any team who considers him in the future. He’ll remain in Stage 3 of the substance-abuse program for the remainder of his career. His re-entry to the league will be solely up to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell.

Here’s my story covering all of this with Browner.

Our Dave Boling wrote about the rise of the Cardinals, who have won six of seven to move into playoff contention. Pete Carroll said Wednesday that Arizona is playing well above the level it was in Week 7 when the Seahawks handled it 34-22 in Glendale. From Boling:

The Cardinals were 3-4 when the Seahawks left following a 34-22 win in October.

Since then, they’ve lost only to Philadelphia (24-21 on the road), and have beaten Indianapolis (a team that topped Seattle) by a 40-11 margin.

In those seven games, Palmer has thrown 13 touchdowns against four interceptions. Seattle’s Russell Wilson in that span? The same, 13 touchdowns and four interceptions.

The difference between the Cardinals then and now?

“Well, we’ve just kind of gotten used to playing together,” Arians said. “When you put it all together for the first year, it takes a little time, especially offensively, and you could see, after that week, us continue to get better offensively.”

One other note: The Seahawks’ shutout of the Giants on Sunday was the first road shutout of the year in the league. It was also the first in the NFL since the 49ers shut out the New York Jets, Sept. 30, 2012. Since 2000, there have been just 39 road shutouts in the NFL (2.8 per season), with just three in the last three seasons, illustrating just how rare it is.


> ESPN writes about Pete Carroll chasing something that hasn’t been done: Win BCS and NFL titles. The BCS didn’t come into the college game until 1998, so that’s a caveat for consideration. Still, he could be the first.

> At, the focus is on Richard Sherman.

> also writes that seven Seahawks are leading vote-getters in Pro Bowl balloting.

> Seahawks punter Jon Ryan insists that punters are not defenseless on punt returns.

> Arizona coach Bruce Arians says last year’s 58-0 whitewashing at CenturyLink Field has nothing to do with this season.

> Pete Carroll tells Arizona reporters, “We’re not done yet.”

> In case you missed it, here’s Richard Sherman’s column on Monday Morning Quarterback saying that having the Super Bowl in a possibly snowy environment is a bad idea, though it favors the Seahawks’ style.

> Monday Morning Quarterback writes that Bruce Arians should be coach of the year for the second consecutive year.

> In a stunner, Todd McShay of ESPN thinks the Seahawks will look to draft an offensive lineman in the first round.

> 49ers CEO Jed York says Jim Harbaugh has not asked for more control on personnel decisions.

Leave a comment Comments → 80
  1. “He’ll remain in Stage 3 of the substance-abuse program for the remainder of his career. His re-entry to the league will be solely up to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell.”

    This surely depends on the outcome of said legal suit, right?

    I think BB is likely done here regardless. This actually makes it more likely he stays IMO as the reduced price assuming his winning a suit would be his chance to stay. I think he was definitely gone if some other team offered him good money.

  2. jawpeace says:

    Browner I feel should not have been in stage 3. But my feelings don’t matter. I do think that he will be successful in his court. As it really makes no sense that one you have to report to a former employer. And two that he was not even living in the USA. With that I do agree that his chances of returning are better. As he won’t be getting a big $$$. Much like when Hill got busted for pot before FA and nobody pursued him and he ended up resigning with the Hawks. Though I bet JS and PC are a little miffed at him for abusing when they gave him a bonus at the beginning of the year.

    It is real cool that 7 Hawks are doing very well in votes for their positions. On that note I am very surprised that Unger is leading all centers. I think he has missed too many games to be ranked number 1. All well it is nice to have a Hawk player over valued for once that breaks the old trend and perception of undervaluing players on a team that plays in North Alaska.

  3. MikeFromNewJersey says:

    Its hard for me to feel bad for BB.. This guy made these mistakes on his own, he used drugs, he took Ped’s, and now we are suppose to feel sorry for him because the NFL maybe advanced his stages. No way no how. Goodbye BB this train is leaving without you. I find it hard to believe he had no idea that he was suppose to take random drug test.. He probably refused to take these test back then because he knew he would fail. Regardless we have a roster stacked with hungry talented players who can get it done without committing penalties once a drive.

  4. DanielleMND says:

    Aldon Smith has multiple felony firearms charges against him, plus a DUI charge pending. Is he suspended indefinitely? NFL rules make absolutely no sense.

  5. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Browner is the new Leroy Hill.
    If he does have to serve a one year suspension we just might have him back for a playoff run next year on the cheap, if of course there is a need in the secondary at that time.
    Either way I really like what we have going on now with our secondary and this could very well be an addition by subtraction thing.

  6. chuck_easton says:


    Aldon Smith has yet to fail an NFL drug test that would land him in the Substance Abuse Program. And as you said he has numerous charges ‘pending’.

    Marshawn Lynch has a DUI charge pending as well, but he’s still playing.

    NFL rules make perfect sense when it comes to the Banned substances part of the CBA.

    1st PED failed test 4 games. Second 8 games. 3rd lifetime ban.

    1st failed test for banned drugs. Entry into stages program at Stage 1. Failure to complete the substance abuse program or failed test while in substance abuse program Stage 2. Failed test or failure to do the testing while in Stage 2 move into Stage 3. Failed test while in Stage 3 1 year suspension or the correct wording ‘indefinite suspension with the ability to apply for reinstatement after 1 year’.

    Browner was in Stage 3. How he got into Stage 3 is still in question, but he knew he was in Stage 3, he has known he was in Stage 3 since signing with Seattle (Seattle didn’t know he was in Stage 3 until after they signed him…but they were advised shortly after he signed that he was in Stage 3.

    He failed a drug test while the NFL considered him in Stage 3. He gets the automatic indefinite suspension associated with that failed test.

    If/when Aldon Smith and/or Lynch are convicted by the Courts then the NFL will consider punishment likely in the form of suspensions.

    How does this not make sense. You have one guy that has failed multiple tests. Has failed a PED test and served a 4 game suspension. Just failed another test.

    You compare him to a guy that has been charged in criminal court but has yet to be convicted. The NFL policy is they don’t suspend for a criminal arrest, they suspend for a conviction.

  7. chuck_easton says:


    Compare this to your employment. Say your employer has a drug testing policy for what ever reason, and you are made aware when to take the job that you WILL be tested. You are further made aware that a positive test for any controlled substance would be grounds for punishment up to and including being terminated. You and your co-workers all take the mandatory testing and one of your co-workers fails that drug test and is now subject to the terms of employment.

    About that time another employee gets arrested and charged with DUI. That employee hasn’t been convicted. That employee hasn’t had their license suspended (assuming your job requires you to have a license). That employee has yet to be convicted of any crime.

    Which of the above two employees has fallen under your terms of employment and is subject to immediate and well defined punishment?

    The employee who has been proven to have been using banned substances contrary to the terms of employment or the employee that has been arrested but not convicted for an incident that happened outside the terms of employment?

    Does that make sense to you?

  8. djbargelt says:

    OK, my soap-box time.

    It’s high time ( no pun intended ) that we REALLY look at this old 1930’s mentality on the legal approach to Marijuana and it’s use. I’m 60 now, but was arrested in 1971 at the tender age of 18 for smoking it and charged with a FELONY ! We were a bunch of dumb kids just graduating from High School and had a quarter ounce and a Hookah pipe with us. I had been a good kid and never in trouble.

    Point is here, as Marijuana use becomes more accepted and it’s use controlled legally, the NFL needs to rethink it’s penalties for it’s use among players. Let’s get our heads out of the sand and realize that these young guys just left collage and the party years, and smoking pot is pretty damn prevalent. One player recently said that at least half of the players smoke pot.

    Lets at least start to consider it in the same approach as alcohol use and adjust the suspensions to mirror those of drinking booze.

  9. GeorgiaHawk says:

    chuck- That makes sense to me.
    And you may have to copy that post because I have a feeling you will need to use it over and over again. Lol.

  10. GeorgiaHawk says:

    djbargelt- You make a lot of sense, however so long as big pharma is sleeping with the Government, ( and perhaps to some degree with the NFL) the stupid war on Marijuana will continue to help ruin many lives.

  11. UltimateHawk says:

    djbargelt – Seems like a perfect issue for the NFLPA to campaign against. Where are they in this regard???

  12. montanamike2 says:

    Although i like Browners physical play, he does tend to get lit up by smaller faster receivers. He’s good against the Brandon Marshall and Vincent Jackson types, but got burned against other types. PC/JS didn’t want this but it does solve their problem with next year as Maxwell, Lane and Thurmond are young cheap studs that play well against the same guys Browner had trouble with. This solves 1 problem for cap implications.

  13. chuck_easton says:


    The argument that the NFL shouldn’t be testing for MJ is valid. Problem is as of 2013 they DO test for its use and they DO list as one of their banned substances.

    The players know this. The NFLPA knows this. The players are told what will happen if they are found to be using a banned substance.

    If/when the use of marijuana is considered legal and if/when it takes on the same social acceptance of alcohol then the NFL can and likely will modify their list of banned substances.

    It’s the same argument that has been used for several ‘moral’ laws. Rosa Parks was arrested, charged, and convicted for refusing to give up her seat for a white passenger. At the time and in her community that was the LAW. It was an unjust law, it was a discriminatory law, and it had no business being the law. But it was. So at that time she was breaking the law and was duly arrested. The law eventually changed.

    So long as MJ is considered by the Federal Government to be a controlled substance the NFL can and will continue to list it on their substance abuse program. Yes certain States have legalized it, but the Federal laws are still in force. The NFL operates Federally and not just in certain states.

  14. Southendzone says:

    Totally unfair to say BB is the new Leroy Hill. You put him in the same boat as someone accused of domestic violence (twice I think)? That while you hear his teammates say he’s a great man and great father? That’s BS.

    BB screwed up in terms of the drug policy, but the circumstances are far from straightforward, it looks like he never should have been in phase 3, and clearly passed multiple tests during his time with the Hawks.

    I’m rooting for the guy and hope he sues the league’s balls off.

  15. RDPoulsbo says:

    To use a much more extreme case, Aaron Hernandez is still not technically suspended from the league. Admittedly, its kind of hard to play football when you’re locked up in a jail cell.

    People can get on a soap box about marijuana all they want, but the reality is until its legalized, and likely even then, the NFL will continue to keep the policy. Alcohol abuse is also on that list even though its been legal for 90 years. Its primarily about protecting the image of the league, not just because it’s illegal. Yes, you might think it’s stupid, but the reality is it helps the league to keep it more than it hurts.

  16. GeorgiaHawk says:

    What I meant about Browner being the new Leroy Hill is that he screws up just before he is in line for a bid pay increase. Hill did that twice.

  17. GeorgiaHawk says:


  18. chuck_easton says:


    Look at this from a different subject matter and see if it makes better sense.

    You are aware your driver’s license is suspended. You don’t agree that your license should have been suspended, and for argument sake, in reality your license had no business being suspended.

    You continue to drive on that suspended license for 3 years and never take any steps to correct the problem.

    On your way to work this morning you get pulled over for some valid reason and the officer gives you that famous line “are you aware your license has been suspended?” as he’s adding that HUGE fine for driving while suspended.

    Do you then have the right to fight that ticket in Court and now claim your license never should have been suspended? The first question the traffic court judge is going to ask is ‘did you know your license was suspended?’ The second question ‘ how long have you known?’. The third question ‘Why didn’t you take any steps prior to today to correct the problem?’. You will then be rightfully convicted for driving while suspended. Not for driving while ERRONEOUSLY suspended.

    Browner failed a drug test while knowing he was in Stage 3. His time to fight being in Stage 3 was for the past three years, not now AFTER he is found to be in violation of the terms of Stage 3.

    I’m the Judge hearing his case and it’s argument over.

  19. chuck_easton says:

    Further, the NFL substance abuse policy is very clear. Once a player is placed in Stage 3, they remain in Stage 3 the remainder of their career. There is no get out of jail free card for good behavior.

    A player can be in Stage 3 for 10 years and pass every test up until that 10th year. Automatic ‘indefinite suspension with the ability to apply for reinstatement after 1 year’.

    As soon as Browner was informed in 2010 that he was in Stage 3 he knew it was for the rest of his playing days. If he thought he shouldn’t be in Stage 3 he should have argued against it then, not after he has a failed test.

  20. Southendzone says:

    Chuck, to that question I’m going to say the laws were never applied correctly in the first place to suspend my license, therefore the suspension and therefore any & all legal repercussions from that suspension are invalid.

    And the reason I never took action against it while knowing it was a crock of crap all along is that it had no impact on me until today.

    In fact, for Browner, his advancement to stage 3 could have had an impact on him besides his current suspension. When a team considers signing you, I’m pretty sure they find out about your status in the NFL’s SA program, therefore his stage 3 status could logically have already cost him contract $ or years in the league where he couldn’t find a job.

    Maybe BB has been trying to get off the phase 3 all along, maybe not but it doesn’t matter either way. If there’s a real argument he should never have been put in phase 3, he deserves some leniency.

  21. RDPoulsbo says:

    I hope you aren’t you’re own lawyer sez. That’s like saying you won’t pay your parking fine because you unilaterally declared it was unwarranted as you look at the boot on your car. That’s the stuff you have to take care of right away so it’s straightened out with the powers that be, not pretend it didn’t happen.

  22. GeorgiaHawk says:

    I think Sherman might have the inside track to Defensive MVP this season.

  23. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Oops. Wrong pic.

    Meant to post this one.

  24. RDPoulsbo says:

    Whatever the problem is, it’s between him and the league. The Seahawks are out of the picture. If you look at the article, it has no mention of am impending lawsuit from Browner and they are the ones who broke the story. This is what I mean by reporters are really nothing more than PR hacks. I have a lot less respect for Farnsworth and Ventrella ‘reporting’ on the Seahawks a employees of the team. I see this as both sides acting irresponsibly and both are wrong.

  25. RDPoulsbo says:

    Ryan is on the money about not considering punters to be defenseless. Huber was trying to make a play so he should have expected someone to try and block him. It was a textbook illegal hit, but one that refs usually miss. They’re used to looking for illegal hits on the ball carrier, not would be tacklers in that situation so I don’t fault them for missing the call.

    Perhaps a better suggestion is to require full facemasks for all players. If Huber had more protection than 2 bars, he wouldn’t have taken a direct hit to the chin, breaking his jaw, or had the violent snap back of the head that broke a vertebrae.

  26. DanielleMND says:

    Chuck, sorry, still doesn’t make sense to me. Also, if my employer had a drug policy, it should no longer apply if I’m no longer employed by them (like Browner becoming an employee of a CFL team). So Browner has a point that he should have only faced a 4-game suspension.

  27. yankinta says:

    Yup Yup… Browner,, Sue the League…. We’re with you. You will win in court and we will give you a ring after we win the Superbowl…. But you’ll leave as an unrestricted free agent and sign with another team. In return we’ll get a 5th or 6th round draft pick (Compensatory).

    Speaking of 5th round picks,, have you guys seen this??

    As I said from Day one. Luke Willson will be a Steal for us and Vance McDonald will be a bust. Been saying 2 Seasons ago that 49ers Front Office is Way Overrated….

  28. hawkfaninoklahoma says:

    yankinta, no offense but every time you say”I said from Day one” i think you are automatically full of shit.
    great read on wilson thou

    browner, broke the rule period, next man up. i am not getting into morality or ethical debates on this. he was a dumbass and should be cut regardless.

    i think they blow arizona out palmer 5 sacks/ 2 picks and a 52% completion
    hawks 37 cards 19

    see yankinta that is how you predict. bold and right out front

  29. seaturkeys says:

    I would like for Browner and Roger Goodell to be sentenced to prison together, in the same cell.

  30. Dukeshire says:

    Chuck – Thank you for your clear and well reasoned posts. But as Georgia said, I fear you will be posting the same thing over and over.

  31. TallyHawk says:

    Didn’t roethlisberger get suspended but never convicted? Didn’t the commish just say it was for conduct in becoming an NFL player? How does that not apply to Aldon smith? Does the new cba make it so there must be a conviction?

  32. yankinta says:

    hawkfaninoklahoma,, lol umm okay if you say so… :) smh….

  33. MoSeahawk12 says:

    Bottom line, Browner is no longer a factor on this years team. He will not jam another receiver, make another tackle, or interception this season. He is not part of the current team that is game planning and practicing to play the Cardinals this week. A game vital in importance as it gives us the division and home field through out the playoffs. They need this one as we know they will struggle with the Rams D the following week. Browner was a good player while he was here, but he is now a complete non factor in regular season wins, playoff wins and hopefully a Superbowl win.

  34. Southendzone says:

    Browner’s agent details a lot of the points of contention he has with the league in this article.

    Surprisingly he doesn’t mention parking tickets or boots on Browner’s car tiere.

  35. yankinta says:

    Those of you that say Browner should be Cut or he is no longer a factor,, I think you all are being short sighted. We want Browner to Sue and Win against the League.

    We want him to get leave as an unrestricted free agent and play well for another team…. that way, we would possibly net another 5th or 6th round pick (Compensatory) :)

    Late Round Picks are GOLD for this FO led by JS/PC….. and that is a FACT!!!

  36. I can’t help thinking that this could have been an attempt to damage the Hawks by some in the NFL. I lost my belief in their integrity in SB XL, and with the travel schedule each year. Farfetched, I know, but possible.

  37. MoSeahawk12 says:

    We won’t get anything for Browner as his legal case will drag on for a long period of time. Regardless of the outcome, the team doesn’t need and won’t be involved in this distraction. He is also damaged goods at this point and the odds he gets signed by another team next season is very nil as he won’t even be eligible until late December if at all. No team will bring a multiple violator in that late.
    There will not be any compensatory pick for Browner.

  38. yankinta says:

    MoSeahawk12,, lol how many times you and I have disagreed and how many times have I come out on top? :)

    However, I’m not saying he will win in a very short time but I’m saying that’s what we should Want for our Seahawks…. That’s the best Case Scenario, that’s what we should all Want!! And I do see this as a good possibility and will give it 50/50 chance happening….

  39. SlickToxic21 says:

    I told you guys yankinta was annoying….smh……I told you guys that from the first day…smha….I said that although sometimes he brings useful info to the board, that quite often that info is lost because of his unbelievably desperate and childish need to let everyone know that he’s always right…..95% of the time anyways…smhya. You guys should have listened, but you didn’t… head is getting really sore now….that’s how right I was and how wrong the rest of you were.

  40. OregonHawk says:

    This is why you are looked down upon Yank

    MoSeahawk12,, lol how many times you and I have disagreed and how many times have I come out on top?

  41. MoSeahawk12 says:

    Nobody comes out on top as he’s gone. Hard to play well on another team when you’re not on another team.
    At least you always come out on top with yourself.

  42. MoSeahawk12 says:

    OregonHawk, it’s not just me right? At least the weekend is almost here and the blog improves a ton without his/her “contributions”. Some people just need extra internet hugs or something.

  43. yankinta says:

    lol,, awww ok ok, I’m sorry… :)

  44. yankinta says:

    LOVE IT!!! :)

    Browner’s agent, Peter Schaffer, said “We will continue to exhaust all administrative remedies,” Schaffer told PFT by phone. “If not successful, we will sue the living daylights out of the league.”

  45. wazzulander says:

    I’ll have to watch the game this sunday from the Portland airport, if anyone can reccomend a good bar there I’d appreciate it.

  46. SlickToxic21, the rest of us all just brainwashed… :) smh….

  47. chuck_easton says:


    Again the issue of whether Browner should have or should not have been in Stage 3 is for another day.

    The fact is that he claims he was not aware he was in Stage 3 when he returned to the NFL from the CFL in 2010. The team has stated that they were not aware and that there is a requirement that the League office has to advise teams of a players status in the Substance Abuse program because it does have a bearing on that team signing the player.

    Both Browner and the team have stated they were advised of Browner’s status in Stage 3 shcrtly after he signed in 2010. So the team and Browner have gone on the last three years knowing Browner was in the 1 strike and your out program.

    The time to argue was in 2010. If Browner and his agent (as supported by the NFLPA) could have made a reasonable and valid argument as to why he should not be in Stage 3 they should have. If the league denied that argument and insisted Browner was in Stage 3 he could have gone to Court back in 2010.

    Instead Browner goes through 3 years knowing he is in Stage 3 (rightfully or wrongly) and it is only after a failed drug test does he raise the issue of his status. Too late.

    But even then the league and Browner tried to reach a compromise. The league proposed he be suspended up until October 2014 or approximately 8 games (1/2 a season not a full season). Browner rejected that proposal and stated he would only accept a FINE and no suspension what so ever.

    Browner wanted to claim he was back in Stage 1.

    So by CBA rules (as agreed to by the NFLPA and the Owners) the league has every right to suspend him for 1 year. They offer 1/2 that to save face for both of them. Browner only wants ZERO suspension. Without a compromise the leagues only option is to go with the full suspension or no suspension. They chose the suspension allowed under Stage 3.

    But what it comes back to is Browner DID fail a drug test. He tested positive for a banned substance. We all assume it was MJ but we don’t know for sure. The league can’t say. So Browner was eligible for a suspension/fine or combination.

    Browner made the all or nothing gambit and lost.

    From a purely legal perspective I can see the argument about whether Browner was properly or improperly placed in Stage 3. But the time to have that decided isn’t after the fact.

    Even if Browner wins his Court case, and he has a huge uphill fight, he would only receive his paycheck for the last two games of this regular season. So he’s fighting for 2 paychecks and the ability to get back into the league for some other team next year. There won’t be a ruling before next year. Courts don’t work that fast. So, he’s going to have to go the STAY route to try and get the suspensin stayed pending trial. I can’t see a Court giving that immediately because he’s also injured and can’t play anyway. The monetary loss for the two remaining games can be put back later.

  48. RDPoulsbo says:

    I’m moving on. Browner can fight his case in court, but 5 days from when he knew or should have known was only in the past week? That doesn’t even pass the smell test as I revert back to what I said yesterday: the 10 drug tests a month over the past year should have been a clue.

    HFA and the division is on the line Sunday. While the Cards are playing much better, Palmer has yet to experience the 12th Man treatment. Their D is playing great, but Honey Badger is on the IR. My prediction is 17-13 Seahawks.

  49. bulldog80 says:

    Very good analogies made here this morning. If you can’t see that this is ENTIRELY about BB not obeying the rules 3 DIFFERENT TIMES! then you are simply in denial and completely lack any common sense. This dude has tanked his own career without anyone else’s help. Apparently people still struggle with individuals actually being held accountable for their own actions.

  50. jawpeace says:

    Moffit said,”It’s something that no one really talks about but it is a very creepy thing to take a drug test in the NFL,” he says. “Because there is literally a man that is affiliated with the NFL drug testing, and he calls you into a room. And it’s just you and him, and your pants are down around your ankles, and your shirts off, and he is standing about two feet in front of you, and you are urinating into a cup right in front of him.”
    Dude the tester would be there for many hours with me as my bladder goes on strike faster than a union when someone is watching me. I feel like Kramer on Seinfeld, “I can’t pee when someone is watching me!”

  51. ChrisHolmes says:


    How cool is it that Pete could be the first guy to win a BCS and Superbowl?

    College coaches flame out so often in the NFL. And for good reason; they often don’t adapt to the NFL game and keep trying college-level tricks. They also don’t often adapt to the change from coaching boys on scholarship to coaching young men with million dollar paychecks.

    But look at Pete! He ran a pro-style scheme in college, showing it could not only work, but dominate. And his personality, even at his age, resonates with not just college age kids, but men as well. He’s a non-stop fountain of positive energy and feedback. He has an honest joy in his heart about coaching this game, and his players, regardless of age, feed off that. He connects with them.

    And he’s proven his system and style of play can work at the NFL level.

    I’m so happy for Pete, and so glad he’s our coach.

  52. montanamike2 says:

    Thank you Mr. Paul Allen.

  53. chuck_easton says:

    What it comes down to is Browner is (or was until yesterday) a Seahawk. Fans can look past anything and everything if it means supporting one of their own.

    If Browner were on another team I would bet we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

    But because Browner wore the home uniform for the past 3 months, of course he’s been shafted.

    The part people are missing is that it’s been hinted to, referenced, and stated in an indirect manner that Browner was very likely done in Seattle. The team was simply waiting to hear the outcome of the appeal.

    I would guess that even if Browner had won his appeal he would not have played a single snap the remainder of the season and would not have been offered a new contract for 2014.

    Todd has stated numerous times when asked about Browner’s return that he didn’t expect to see him at all the remainder of the year. But he’s a Seahawk so we must look past the fact that Browner failed a drug test and defend him whole heartedly against the system.

  54. Nothing to do with football and only marginally related to the BB suspension, so feel free to skip this post.

    After years of testing in the Army, I got pretty used to peeing in a cup in front of an audience. I was also a trained observer myself, which, trust me, is not fun.

    My first drug test in the civilian world was quite different. When I got to the testing center, there was a young woman running the office, and nobody else. She handed me a cup and asked me to follow her to the restroom. Of course, I’m thinking, “there is NO WAY I’m going to be able to pee in front of this girl!”

    When we got the the restroom, she sent me in by myself and told me to come out when the cup was full. I was a bit embarrassed that I had thought she was going to observe me (duh!), but also a bit shocked the the test was not witnessed at all.

  55. chuck_easton says:


    Welcome to the reality of drug testing. It’s not pretty but the procedure is the only way to ensure a player doesn’t bring in his ‘sample’ in another container. It ensures there will be no more ‘wizinator’ incidents.

    And the only way a specimen collector can take the stand ant testify (if necessary) that it was the urine from the player (read as much graphically into that as you wish), then you don’t have that black and white determination that the positive test came from the player.

    The no shirt/pants around the ankles part was added after the ‘wizinator’ incident with the Vikings running back. The collector must be able to state that he was present and observed that there was no other means of producing the sample other than how genetics intended. Sounds gross, but thems the breaks.

  56. raymaines says:

    Having nothing to do with the Seahawks in any way, shape or form, but too funny not to share:

  57. CDHawkFan says:

    Interesting that Moffitt feels at least 50% of the players smoke pot, maybe more.

    While unscientific, I hope a lot of ‘know it alls’ on here take note this is from a player in the locker room. Guys smoke pot. Yes it’s against the rules, so does that make 50% of nfl players stupid?

    I say know it alls because a lot of people were on Thurmond case and Browner’s saying they should be cut, well how about cutting half of this team?

  58. chuck_easton says:


    No doubt 50% or more smoke pot. That doesn’t give any wiggle room to a guy that knows he’s in Stage 3 and will be tested randomly as much as 10 times a month to roll the dice with the knowledge that a failed test means suspension. Especially a guy that is playing on a team that has championship aspirations and talent. That is selfish.

    Oh, and now that Thurmond has been given a 4 game suspension for pot or whatever it was, he will return to the team next week in the lifetime Stage 3 program. He’s already failed a test to get into stages and failed a second test to get the four game suspension. Thurmond now joins the 1 strike and your out program. Let’s hope he isn’t selfish enough to put his personal choice above the team.

  59. Aldon Smith has yet to fail an NFL drug test that would land him in the Substance Abuse Program. And as you said he has numerous charges ‘pending’.

    Actually we don’t know that – you can get in the program with no public knowledge. it isn’t until stage 2 where you get suspended and it becomes public

  60. Ewalters7354 says:

    My only thing is if Browner did so wrong and failed the test knowing he was in Stage 3,why in the hell did the league try and offer him a reduced suspension?Something is not right here.

  61. Ewalters7354 I agree something is not right.

  62. yankinta says:

    Ewalters7354,, Exactly!! That’s why I said Browner has a good chance to win this lawsuit and leave our Hawks Team as an Unrestricted Free Agent,, and we could get Compensatory Pick for him the following year… :)

  63. PugetHawk says:

    I am struggling with the fact that I can’t vote for Michael Bennett or Cliff Avril for the Pro-Bowl. I would definitely vote for Bennett, maybe on Avril.

    Also, Maxwell has as many picks as most of the corners on this list and I cannot vote for him yet I can vote for BB. WTF?

    As for the BB situation, with the play of Maxwell, it doesn’t seem to affect this team other than being a distraction.

  64. Southendzone says:

    Good call Ewalters, there’s something going on.

    I’d say the league is not happy about Sherm winning his appeal last year and it came all the way down from Goodell, something like

    “I’ll be damned if another Seahawks weasels out of a league imposed punishment”

    That’s why you have Browner’s agent crying foul at the appeal process. That’s why when BB claims the cup was damaged the person ruling on the appeal says “oh yeah, we talked to that dude and he said nothing was wrong with the cup” instead of forcing him to testify and be questioned at the appeal.

    That’s why Von Miller can pay off/bribe a drug testing agent and argue his suspension to 6 games, while BB is getting NO wiggle room. Because Von Miller is a $10M + year player and he’s on the Chosen One’s team, and BB is just a hard-working guy on the Seahawks who scratched his way back into the league from the CFL.

    In fact the more I think about it, the more I can already see this playing out. Hawks vs Broncos in the Superbowl, and the calls are so bad, Seahawk fans will drop to their knees and beg for the SB 40 refs to step in.

    Goodell steps on the podium after the game to give Manning the MVP trophy and instead of a handshake gives him an open-mouthed kiss. BOOK IT!

  65. rramstad says:

    The headline is a bit amusing in that I think that the Browner saga is actually just beginning.

    There are some very interesting things to be decided here, including medical privacy issues (leaks on which is owned and operated by his employer) and if an employer has the right to require testing and impose sanctions against ex employees for not complying with collective bargaining agreements for a union that they aren’t even a part of anymore as they are no longer an employee and living out of the country.

    There are also some smaller issues, like notification and proof or lack of proof of delivery, libel or slander (hard to prove, but should not report rumors or innuendo, and also cannot report matters of fact that should be private like medical data), and the lack of any testimony from the test taker in regards to what is claimed to be a botched test. There are also some timing issues in regards to how many games he missed, if that should have reset the timer, if the time that he was tested was long enough to reset the timer, and so forth.

    Frankly I think the smaller issues are not even remotely all that important in the big picture — and why it doesn’t matter if he was in Stage 3 in the NFL when he was signed by the Seahawks or not. I think the two big points above are the primary arguments, and they are significant, and the NFL could be liable for many millions of dollars in fines and payments if they are found to have leaked his personal medical information which is protected by law, and that this leak affected his earning capacity. I also think that it’s pretty clear that the NFL has a problem with how they deal with ex players, they cannot expect them to continue being tested, unless they have proof of delivery of each request for test, they can’t continue escalating them in their system, and they would need to be explicit with each player, in writing, that failure to test would result in an eventual suspension and so if they return to the league they would have to ask for reinstatement.

    The most stinky thing about all of this is that the NFL should not have approved the Browner signing in the first place. He should have had to formally petition for reinstatement, and they should have reinstated him with the caveat that he was in Stage Three. That should have all happened before the signing was official. The NFL failing to do this is a major problem and shows that the system is slipshod and poorly organized. They like to make it sound like it’s all super efficient and 100% reliable, but it clearly isn’t. Do they even have signed receipts of delivery for the notification of tests? I would suspect that they don’t have anything like that.

  66. I dont think the Chosen team will make it to the SB. Just a hunch. PM will choke and teams will find a way to beat them.

  67. CDHawkFan says:

    Chuck, you should have stopped your email to me after the one sentence. My point/email was not about what you have already said 9-10 times in the last 24 hours, I agree with you, that Browner should have known and dealt with the Stage 3 a lot earlier.

    My point was that there were a lot of people coming on suggesting players should get cut because they broke the rules, because they smoked pot, let the team down, etc. I assume these people have not smoked pot, or much pot in their life. They must have forgotten what its like to have free time at the age of 25. Not know the pain that comes with sport, etc, etc, etc. My point is if they still want the pot smokers (guys that break the rules) off the team, then we will have a roster of about 26.5 guys.

  68. yankinta says:

    jboard1,, yup yup… that’s what I think as well. Great Minds think alike… :)

  69. I posted on another thread but has Browner been replaced on the roster?

  70. yankinta says:

    xcman,, nope. I don’t think so. We may not see that until next Monday…

  71. ChrisHolmes says:

    Pot’s been legalized in a couple states now, and will continue to be legalized in others. It’s been proven that it’s NOT a “gateway” drug and that it’s not harmful. It’s no more harmful than alcohol (actually, less so), and we have an entire billion dollar industry built around that socially acceptable form of personal enjoyment.

    Now, people can argue all day long about decision-making, and I’m right there with you on that. If you know you’re going to be drug-tested and you still smoke a joint in a window of time where you could possibly be tested, that’s on you for being dumb.

    But don’t demonize the drug. It’s not the evil that so many make it out to be. It’s actually helpful in a medical sense.

    And no, I’ve never smoked a joint in my life, or done any other kind of illicit drug. I’m not a drug apologist. Just a guy who agrees heavily with science over superstition.

  72. chuck_easton says:

    The issue here isn’t the current social, legal or ethical standing of pot in society. It’s an employer telling their employees that they cannot consume said substance and that failure to follow those rules will lead to eventual suspension.

    If my employer came out with an edict tomorrow that eating chocolate was now against company policy as it leads to obesity I would have a choice to make.

    I stop consuming chocolate and keep my job or I find another job that doesn’t care if I eat it by the truck load just as long as the consumtion doesn’t affect my performance. Of course my choice would be to leave immediately. NO job is worth giving up chocolate.

  73. seaturkeys says:

    Can we get a few probowl appearances from some pothead CFL guards?

  74. RDPoulsbo says:

    As I mentioned above, it doesn’t matter how legal pot gets in the country. If the NFL feels it’s better to maintain pot as a banned substance, they’ll continue to do so, just like alcohol abuse is banned in the league. By that, the interpretation is that while they’re free to drink, they won’t be showing up to practice drunk. Showing up to work drunk in a private company is completely legal in the eyes of the law (with some exceptions like driving around a forklift), but your employer probably frowns upon it.

    So no, legality or even societal attitudes carry no weight on this issue. If the NFL believes it’s better to keep the ban in place for things like it’s image, the ban will stay in place.

  75. Roger Goodell just f’d up. BB and his agent will sue them and the NFL network, and I think they will lose. The NFL network defamed him while leaking his test info (and getting it wrong), and there’s no way it makes sense that the NFL–a private business, albeit a “non-profit”–can force players who are no longer on a team and out of the country for 4 years to submit to drug testing is insane.

    But BB probably should have taken his deal. Now he’s hosed.

    Goodell knows if he loses he’s going to lose power, and his testing program will get trashed. I hope it happens. Its ridiculous how they’ve treated Browner.

  76. Chuck, I fully understand your argument and agree with you. The rules are the rules.

    On the other hand, I do not agree that the rules make sense. You bring up Rosa Parks. Her violation of the rules led to changes. I would hope that Browner’s situation could do the same.

    Rules against PED make sense for obvious reasons, but the rules against recreation drugs is a form of moral judgement, presumably because players are role models. Reasonable enough to have that kind of expectations. Perhaps the league should change its expectations to reflect society better. A DUI is far more dangerous than smoking pot, in most cases. Domestic abuse, firearms violations, assaults, and the like seem more serious than victimless activities that don’t improve player performance. Yet the rules are severe for the latter and almost nonexistent for the former.

    Maybe the league could grow up.

  77. Too bad for Browner. Hope he can make it back to the NFL sometime in the future.

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0