DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Josh Gordon

Being suspended you will be permitted to come back and IMO being BANNED you are never permitted back.

Big difference.

All the articles I have seen use the term "suspended"...

“Josh Gordon of the Cleveland Browns has been suspended without pay for at least one year for violating the NFL Policy and Program for Substances of Abuse. Gordon’s suspension begins immediately,” the league’s official statement said.

not going to argue about semantics. the guy is not allowed back in the nfl untill he is reinstated. just like blackmon. call it a indefinite Suspended, call it what you want lol.

b) Discipline for Stage Three Violations
Failure to Comply in Stage Three: A Player who: fails to cooperate with
testing, treatment, evaluation or other requirements imposed on him by this
Policy or fails to comply with his Treatment Plan, both as determined by the
Medical Director; or who has a Positive Test Result, will be banished from
the NFL for a minimum period of one (1) calendar year.
Banishment: A Player banished from the NFL pursuant to this subsection
will be required to adhere to his Treatment Plan and the provisions of this
Intervention Program during his banishment. During a Player’s period of
banishment, his NFL Player Contract shall be tolled.

https://www.nflpa.com/active-players/drug-policies

well the CBA calls it banishment so....

j/c

Meanwhile, moving on to matters of greater significance...

So if he is Banished what is his treatment plan?

Josh Gordon fails another substance abuse test, faces 1-year suspension, per report

By Jeff Gray @Jeff_GraySBN on Jan 25, 2015, 5:25p

Cleveland Browns wide receiver Josh Gordon has failed another substance abuse test and is subject to a one-year suspension from the NFL, league sources have told ESPN's Adam Schefter. Pro Football Talk reports that Gordon tested positive for alcohol.

Gordon was prohibited from consuming alcohol under the league's substance abuse program, which he entered after pleading guilty to a DUI charge in September of 2014. NFL regulations mandate that such a violation results in a one-year ban from team activities, including workouts and games.

The star wideout now faces his second major ban in as many years. He was originally suspended for the entirety of 2014 after failing a drug test before the season, but had it reduced to 10 games after the NFL reworked its substance abuse policy. He was then suspended by the Browns for the final regular season game for not showing up to a team walkthrough.

There was also a failed drug test in 2013, which led to a two-game suspension.

Given his repeated violations, Gordon's future in Cleveland -- and the NFL in general -- is uncertain. Last month, Browns head coach Mike Pettine suggested that Gordon was already on thin ice following his team rules infraction.

"It's clearly a disappointing end to the year for Josh Gordon," said Pettine. "At some point you get tired of using the word potential ... This offseason for Gordon puts him squarely at a crossroads with us. We want him here, but want him accountable.

"We don't have a lot of rules, but rules that we have are pretty simple. When players break them, there will be consequences."

The Browns released a statement Sunday evening, via Schefter:

"Clearly we are very disappointed to hear the latest report regarding Josh. At this point, due to the confidential nature of the NFL’s substance abuse policy, we have not been made aware by the league of a failed test. We are in the process of gathering more information and will provide further comment at the appropriate time."

Gordon was dismissed from Baylor in 2011 after he tested positive for marijuana. Cleveland selected him in the second round of the supplemental draft in 2012.

Link

The best way to describe it is he's banished from the league with the opportunity to apply for reinstatement after a year. Goodell has to let him back in. If Goodell doesn't let JG back in, JG sits indefinitely.



In practice, this very likely means that if JG stays clean for the year and does all that is asked of him, he will be let back in the league in a year. But it's by no means guaranteed.

edit: wrote my post before you posted the last article. Who cares what words a sports writer uses? The terms are plainly stated in the substance abuse policy. It's sort of a hybrid banishment/suspension (in practice) and really comes down to semantics.

i dont know. i wonder if someone else would have showed up for meeting or give effort at practice?

I sure am glad you said this and not me, but its all Hoyers fault the offense went south, never mind that Gordon often ran the wrong route. If you do the math and if the WR just runs the wrong route 3-4 times a game when he is the target what happens next is pretty predictable.

Well Hoyer wasn't obligated to throw to the guy. Gordon on the field is a legitimate threat that teams account for, thus should be taking heat off the other receivers that Hoyer could've gone to instead making everybody including himself more productive.

This hindsight, agenda biased, revisionist drivel is easy! Hoyer is history, moving on and back on track:

Legitimate question; when the Browns suspended Gordon, he didn't play enough games to credit a contract year and was pretty narked. At the time it was mentioned he filed a grievance on that in house suspension. Did that get resolved?

Some people are ignorant by choice, your clearly one of THEM.

Good for you

The Browns were 6-4 without Gordon, 1-5 with him. Points per game dropped 43.5 percent, from 21.6 the first 10 to 12.2 the final six. First downs went from 20.3 to 15.1; passing yards from 243 to 172.5; and total yards from 359.1 to 277.

Turnovers doubled -- from 1.0 to 2.2 per game -- and offensive touchdowns dropped from 2.3 to 0.5 per game......


But left tackle Joe Thomas said that Gordon's return "seemed to throw off the rhythm a little bit of our offense, and we obviously didn't play as well. So statistically, it's a pretty easy case to make."

Thomas also said: "We played better on offense before he came back."

Kinda mincing words here, but on the payroll leads one to believe he's getting paid, he is not getting paid. What he really is is under contract but suspended and while suspended he's not getting paid

technically I think he is both banned and suspended.... all bans are also a suspension but not all suspensions are a banishment.

so he is banished from the NFL and suspended from the team.

You all sound like a bunch of school girls arguing over the semantics.

Probably not well... which has got to make any sane person wonder WHY was he even inserted as the #1 when he couldn't have been demonstrating in practice that he deserved it?

As for being away from the team.... sorry, he's a professional. Beyond the whole "he did it to himself" thing, he had playbooks and could call a teammate at any time. If nothing else, it has no bearing at all on showing up out of shape.

I normally let these things go, but given the condescension and the context, I find these quotes so funny:





As far as Gordon, I've always been far more concerned with his decision making and attitude than the actual circumstances that removed him from the game. I'll be shocked if he ever gets out of his own way.

Lol...

Whether he's suspended, banned, selling used cars, getting another infraction is all meaningless.

He won't be a part of this organization for least a year, that's the end of the story right there.

I'm putting my money on before he's reinstated, he will get himself another infraction, then we all can argue his permanent ban.

Funny how birds of a feather..............

Oh dear...

Just for clarification .........

Josh Gordon's contract is suspended while he is. He is not paid one cent while under suspension and/or banishment. Further, in order for his contract to vest last year, he had to be active for at least 6 games. The Browns suspended him for game 16, as he had violated team rules ..... so he was active for only 5 games, and so last year did not vest.

So, he had signed a 4 year contract, but whenever/if he is reinstated, he will still be in the 3rd year of his contract, with a 4th year remaining ..... if he can stay out of trouble.

Exactly right Ytown.

JG filed a grievance over his week 17 suspension in 2014. If he wins (won?) that, his 2014 season would vest although the latest info I can find on that is from Feb 17 of this year. It seems like a simple enough thing to make a decision on but it is the NFL and sometimes these things take months. Do you know anything more about that?

Wow,, I forgot he filed that grievance.. I just tried to see if a decision was made, but maybe I'm looking in all the wrong places because I can't find anything other than a few articles. (like the one you provided)

Doesn't appear that it's been decided on yet.

hey, it's simple, he broke a team rule, they suspended him for a game, that killed his chances of getting out early.

Seems to me that it's cut and dry, but this IS the NFL afterall, nothing is what it seems..

I don't know if he even can pursue that grievance while he is suspended. Given the situation, and the fact that he was suspended as soon as the season ended, I would almost bet money that he will be unsuccessful in his grievance. The Browns suspended him for that game for cause, and then he went and violated his conditions of reinstatement. I see no wa the NFL rewards him for this.

i was thinking about that. i think they would have to. what if he is never reinstated? there is still a game check involved with that grievance right?

Well yeah,, if he was suspended in bad faith, sure, he should get a game check, But my guess is that's not the way it will come down.. Just a guess of course

j/c:

I figured Vambo entered this thread when I saw all the new posts.

Who cares what you call it? He isn't here.

purp and ddbub actually made some good points about Gordon and our offense. Too bad they got swallowed by the avalanche of nonsense.

I am not sure about this, but it seems like the OC and QB would be inclined to go to Gordon after his amazing performance from the previous year. After all, why would you not want to use such a weapon?

I think the problem stems from Gordon himself. I remember making a thread about him being a punk. Got crucified for it. But man, his body language on the field told me all I needed to know. He was dogging it, and NO, I am not talking about him having long strides. I am talking about his effort on passes on the sidelines and in traffic. How he threw his arms up in the air. How he came back to the huddle. How he rounded routes. Etc, etc.

He looked--and played--like a guy who wanted to be anywhere else other than playing offense for the Cleveland Browns.

I have a question for a bunch of you: I remember thread after thread w/hundreds of posts each about Gordon. I remember all the support he received. I remember all the name-calling directed towards me because I said he needed help rather than excuses that enabled him to make the same mistakes over and over. I remember people wanting Goodall fired. I remembered the clamor over Ray Rice and others. I remember all the posts about how he only took cough medicine and only took one toke off one joint, and was innocent because the pot in the car wasn't his, etc, etc.........

How y'all feeling now? Violated or vindicated? I bet it isn't the latter. It's gotta sting a lil bit to defend someone so vociferously, only to have him stab you in the heart yet again. Eh?

For the love of all things proper........Please bring down this thread!

well i know is......

The Browns were 6-4 without Gordon, 1-5 with him. Points per game dropped 43.5 percent, from 21.6 the first 10 to 12.2 the final six. First downs went from 20.3 to 15.1; passing yards from 243 to 172.5; and total yards from 359.1 to 277.

Turnovers doubled -- from 1.0 to 2.2 per game -- and offensive touchdowns dropped from 2.3 to 0.5 per game......


and joe thomas said.


But left tackle Joe Thomas said that Gordon's return "seemed to throw off the rhythm a little bit of our offense, and we obviously didn't play as well. So statistically, it's a pretty easy case to make."

Thomas also said: "We played better on offense before he came back.

call it coaching, call it QB, call it route running. but we would have been better off without him.

And everyone was talking football until you started the personal attacks.

Once again, you want to tell people what they can and can't post and you want to offend them in the process..

Man... that sentence was really painful to read.

The fact that it's true didn't help matters either.


Wow.
Pretty much sums up life as a Browns fan, doesn't it?

All I see is that the union appealed his suspension back on Feb 17. I don't see anything on the 1st couple of pages after that.

OUCH!

That left a mark:Brayin' is better. Just wow. We should move along. Thread is dead IMO.

Personally, i feel violated by the pee-poor effort he put on the field, but not by the "gotcha" 1 year suspension for him having drinks after the Browns' season was over on a team-sanctioned flight. JMO.