DawgTalkers.net
Posted By: WVDawg54 More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 01:25 AM
Vers said:
Quote:

I will say that there are catch words being thrown around like they are factual. Cold-cocked is one of them. She was trying to beat the crap out of him. She was punching him, kicking him, etc. Repeatedly. He finally had enough and decked her. People are acting like he just punched her because they were arguing. That isn't true.




My response.
I am a male 6'2" 245 lbs and have a wife half my size. A couple of times, she has had too much to drink and becomes aggressive (sometimes due to my past transgressions), where she has kicked, punched, and strangled me. What did I do? I moved her to the side and gone to bed. Did she follow me to bed? Yes, and tried to continue to escalate the situation. What did I do? I moved to the guest room. Did she follow me to the guest room? Yes. What did I do? I left the house until she calmed down. Never once did I try to strike her or try to subdue her into unconsciousness.

Vers, you can ride your high horse as much as you want, but we (as men) are not all hard-wired to assault women.

We have two beautiful kids and still have our problems, but I avoid confrontation with my wife because it is the right thing to do. I value our family over my career and would always walk away, regardless of kicks, punches or strikes.

Why??? Because I could knock my wife out with one punch. I know it and she knows it. Does it make me feel like a better man? No. It just accents the fact that I am physically superior to her.
Posted By: Jester Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 01:53 AM
jc


In the long run what is better for Gordon and what is better for the Browns, I don't claim to know. I can see the reasoning behind both sides of the discussion.

Vers is right about Rice. We don't know what happened in that elevator. Perhaps she did come at him with a knife. Why do we keep seeing video of Rice pulling her out of the elevator but they never show video from inside the elevator? And you cannot tell me that doesn't exist. Any reasonably sized casino has security cameras in their elevators.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 01:54 AM
I get that, my man. I really do. I have never hit a woman in my life, but two wrongs do not make a right and I only brought up the other part because people are stating things as facts when in truth it is speculation.
Posted By: archbolddawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 02:11 AM
Quote:

I get that, my man. I really do. I have never hit a woman in my life, but two wrongs do not make a right and I only brought up the other part because people are stating things as facts when in truth it is speculation.




Even if the "truth" is in speculation............when does a man decide he has the right to cold . a lady? Where are his bruises, or claw/scratch marks? Where is the evidence of him being beaten?

There aren't any? Oh, that's interesting.

What we do know is they got in an elevator..............and we do know she was drug out of the elevator, unconscious. Do the math. You've already done the math on Gordon - do the math on Rice.

Then, look any respectable person in the eye and say "Eh, she probably asked for it."

2 wrongs don't make a right, you are correct. However, in rice's case you want to ignore the obvious..........perhaps you feel he was right?

And in Gordon's case, you're humping for a year ban to "prove a lesson."
Posted By: cfrs15 Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 02:49 AM
Hasn't everything already been discussed? What more is there to say until we find out what actually happens?
Posted By: BADdog Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 02:55 AM
Quote:

Hasn't everything already been discussed? What more is there to say until we find out what actually happens?



stay tuned
Posted By: YTownBrownsFan Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 03:36 AM
From the other thread .......

Quote:

Man............are you kidding me? It's a pattern of behavior that tells me he is guilty.




Whoa ..... really?

So no one ever turns their life around, in your world? No one ever changes? Really?

I am glad that I don't live in your world.

You earlier said something along the lines of people not accepting that Gordon had failed 3 tests, or something. Someone else posted an article that stated that Gordon could have made it to stage 2 with a positive test as a rookie, and with the one for codeine, which could have been prescribed for a sore throat, or could have been for something else, but the NFL cut his suspension, so that "doctor" argument was, at least, possible. So, he could have hit stage 3 with one positive test as a rookie, and the positive test for codeine.

It is a concern that he has any pot in his system, as it makes me, personally, wonder just how smart he is still putting himself in position to be anywhere near anyone smoking pot. However, the levels tell me that if he is using pot, it isn't much.

Further, one test should be as valid as any other. There are not as important, obviously, due to escalating penalties, but they should all have to be correct. If one test is shown to have a flaw, then that should be a major concern. In this case, from what we have been told, it appears likely that there is a problem with the test. It doesn't matter how you, or I feel about the test limits, if he should have any pot in his system or not, or anything else ...... just the levels tested at. In this case, if what has been reported is correct, then there is a reasonable doubt as to whether or not he actually tested over the limits allowed. With one test, of one sample being very slightly over the allowable limit, and the other reportedly more under the allowable level, the 2, put together, makes a result under the limit. Because one sample test was over, and one was under, that creates a concern.

If Gordon had tested over the limits, especially by more than he did in the one sample that failed. then I don't think that too many people would be arguing that he made his bed, so he can lie in it. I think that the test limits should be changed for future tests, to reflect the realities of laws in some states, as well as the limits imposed by other sports organizations, and other high importance, safety related jobs. If Gordon had tested over, and not had a second test of that same sample that showed him under the limit, then he should have been suspended. But with the circumstances as they are, If this were a court case, I think he would walk easily. There would certainly be significant enough reasonable doubt to get a case thrown out. While the NFL may not necessarily work that way by rule. given the legal realities that courts do is probably enough to win the case fr Gordon.

Now if Gordon screws up again, he's gone .... and I suspect that it will be more difficult for him to be reinstated. I do suspect that this case, as so very often seems to happen with Browns situations, will result in a rules change after this season going forward. The test levels are antiquated, and so far below anyone else's that it's ridiculous. I don't smoke pot, and I don't necessarily believe that it is good for a person ..... but I think that the current test levels are way too low for any modern organization that operates in states where pot has been decriminalized.

If Gordon's 2 samples had both tested over the limit, then there would be no defense. The second hand smoke thing by his lawyer, or agent, or him, was flat out stupid, because that defense has been rejected before by the NFL. They say that you must control everything that goes into your body. There was no need to even present such a thing, except for the PR aspect. However, the rest of the argument presented by his legal team, as relayed in the press, makes sense.

Just because guy did a thing in the past does not automatically make him guilty of doing so again.
Posted By: 1JohnnyG Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 03:51 AM
Well, maybe now Gordon can plead preventative medicine:

http://www.foxbusiness.com/industries/2014/08/04/kannalife-ceo-medical-marijuana-two-years-away/
Posted By: charman Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 04:02 AM
I don't understand people saying he needs life help that he's so much out of control. I just don't see that. Alittle pot (so what) and slightly over o.8 shouldn't have been driving but haven't we all (or most) after 1 or 2. Anyway I really just don't get all the help he needs the he's so out of control talk. Or is it just me thinking that? I mean does he really need professinal help for smoking weed and having a couple of drinks??
Posted By: PDR Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 04:12 AM
Quote:

Hasn't everything already been discussed? What more is there to say until we find out what actually happens?




...said the guy who ESPN fired later that day.
Posted By: cfrs15 Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 05:38 AM
Quote:

Quote:

Hasn't everything already been discussed? What more is there to say until we find out what actually happens?




...said the guy who ESPN fired later that day.




Do I at least get a severance package?
Posted By: YTownBrownsFan Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 05:47 AM
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Hasn't everything already been discussed? What more is there to say until we find out what actually happens?




...said the guy who ESPN fired later that day.




Do I at least get a severance package?




Nope ... but you do get a parting dead horse beating gif .....

Posted By: Dawgs4Life Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 08:08 AM
j/c

Personally, I'm to the point where this whole thing has become annoying. It's overkill and it has stretched WAY beyond the time frame it should have.
Posted By: ThatGuy Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 08:59 AM
Quote:

I don't understand people saying he needs life help that he's so much out of control. I just don't see that. Alittle pot (so what) and slightly over o.8 shouldn't have been driving but haven't we all (or most) after 1 or 2. Anyway I really just don't get all the help he needs the he's so out of control talk. Or is it just me thinking that? I mean does he really need professinal help for smoking weed and having a couple of drinks??




Perception is reality.

Gordon failed another test, and then right when his hearing was supposd to happen, got the DUI...

People perceive that to be a guy who "can't handle" it or whatever...

As opposed to maybe a guy that walked into a room full of people smoking pot, and a guy who was totally fine after a few drinks, but got pulled over cause he was in a car registered to another guy who has legal problems...

I've said all along that I think he just needs new people around him.

If you've passed 70 tests in the span of a few years, you're obviously not a pot head..
Posted By: Tubby_Dawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 09:46 AM
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Hasn't everything already been discussed? What more is there to say until we find out what actually happens?




...said the guy who ESPN fired later that day.




Do I at least get a severance package?




Nope ... but you do get a parting dead horse beating gif .....






Posted By: texaslostdawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 11:14 AM
Quote:

j/c

Personally, I'm to the point where this whole thing has become annoying. It's overkill and it has stretched WAY beyond the time frame it should have.




+1 annoying is the word for it.
Posted By: Damanshot Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 12:21 PM
If I ever hit a woman, ANY woman, my dad would come back from the dead and kick my butt. It's really simple, you don't hit a woman. End of discussion.
Posted By: FloridaFan Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 12:25 PM
jc..

Since this thread seems to no longer be about a football related topic or even Josh Gordon, can we move it to tailgate?
Posted By: mac Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 01:30 PM

One of the factors ignored in this conversation ... is Gordon caught in the middle of the dispute between the NFL and NFLPA over HGH testing?

While the simple answer is, NO WAY should the two issues be linked, the fact is the NFL could be using Gordon's situation to try to leverage an agreement with the NFLPA for a new drug policy that includes updated limits for drug testing and HGH testing.

One of the factors listed in a recent article...

Yes, marijuana is legal in three states. Yes, it’s a recreational drug. But the league has wanted HGH testing for years. Recently, word broke that a new policy that included HGH testing would include reduced penalties for marijuana. Perhaps Gordon is caught in the middle here as the two sides hammer out these details, because no new agreement on policies and procedures has been reached.

web page

But HGH testing is being held up..since August 2011..over the issue of who will be the final arbiter in particular situations dealing with the testing process or the results.
....the players and NFLPA want a neutral arbitration to decide disputed cases.
....Roger Goodell wants to be the final arbiter in disputed cases.
Posted By: mac Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 01:38 PM
This article was published on May 8, 2014...



NFLPA, NFL at odds over HGH testing
May 8, 2014
JANE MCMANUS via ESPN

NEW YORK -- New NFLPA president Eric Winston said the NFL's plan for HGH testing is on hold because players don't agree with the league's stipulation that commissioner Roger Goodell be the final arbiter in particular disputes around the testing process or the results.

"It's there when [Goodell] wants to sign it," Winston said. "I kind of laugh because it keeps coming up. If he wants HGH testing as bad as he wants to retain his power, then we would have had HGH testing last year. At the end of the day, that's what this is all about: He wants to hold all the cards and he wants to be the judge, jury and executioner, and we're not going to go for an un-American system like that."

Winston made the comments during a meeting at a midtown hotel Wednesday, the day before the first round of the NFL draft.

League spokesman Greg Aiello responded to Winston's remarks Thursday in an email to ESPN.

"It is kind of funny because since 2011 the union has come up with one excuse after another to avoid implementing an agreement to test for HGH," Aiello wrote. "First, it was the testing method; then it was the population study; now it's commissioner authority. Our commitment to testing is clear. The same cannot be said of the union."

The issue has been a lingering point of contention for both sides since a new collective bargaining agreement was passed in 2011, and it arose again this week when Goodell renewed his call for the union to sign an HGH agreement.

"The world has accepted the science," Goodell said in an interview with NFL Network. "There's global understanding of that. And the union needs to sign off on that. It's time to sign off on what we agreed to. They have raised issues. We have addressed all those issues. They're now raising, from time to time, issues that are completely unrelated to HGH testing."

It seems that the NFL and the union don't even agree on the reason they are disagreeing.

NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith said every term other than arbitration method has been agreed upon.

"The process by which we would have HGH testing is agreed to," Smith said. "The population study is agreed to, the manner in which blood would be drawn is agreed to. The number of tests is agreed to. The way in which we determine a violation for taking HGH is agreed to. And it's joint; it's all been agreed to.

"The only thing that has not been agreed to is there is neutral arbitration for every aspect of the drug policy except in cases where there is a violation of law or where there is an evidence-based violation of the drug policy that didn't result in a positive test."

Smith cited the suspension of the New York Yankees' Alex Rodriguez as an example, noting that baseball used a neutral arbiter in its review process.

"We've agreed to everything, except the commissioner wants to be the hearing officer in those final two cases," Smith said. "That's the only thing that's held this up."

Winston said it's been the issue he has been asked about most since he assumed the role of NFLPA president in March, and he said that players won't accept another disciplinary procedure in which Goodell wields all the power.

"To me, it's a system that doesn't work," Winston said. "It showed in the bounty case, and it showed in the StarCaps case.

"[Testing is] not something the players don't want, and when you get into taking blood, there needs to be a neutral arbitrator to deal with all those issues."
web page


...the story above broke about the same time news broke that Josh Gordon may have tested positive for marijuana and could be facing a year suspension.

Just a coincidence....?

Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 02:12 PM
Quote:

I get that, my man. I really do. I have never hit a woman in my life, but two wrongs do not make a right and I only brought up the other part because people are stating things as facts when in truth it is speculation.



I'm confused. You bring up the allegation of being coldcocked and state that is speculation because it happened in the elevator and we don't really know what happened in the elevator.. yet you state as fact that she was punching him and kicking him and beating the crap out of him.... is that a fact or is that also speculation?
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 02:22 PM
Good point.

Too bad you didn't get the point about Rice's innocence or guilt doesn't make Gordon innocent of his violations.
Posted By: clevesteve Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 02:34 PM
Quote:


One of the factors ignored in this conversation ... is Gordon caught in the middle of the dispute between the NFL and NFLPA over HGH testing?

While the simple answer is, NO WAY should the two issues be linked, the fact is the NFL could be using Gordon's situation to try to leverage an agreement with the NFLPA for a new drug policy that includes updated limits for drug testing and HGH testing.

One of the factors listed in a recent article...

Yes, marijuana is legal in three states. Yes, it’s a recreational drug. But the league has wanted HGH testing for years. Recently, word broke that a new policy that included HGH testing would include reduced penalties for marijuana. Perhaps Gordon is caught in the middle here as the two sides hammer out these details, because no new agreement on policies and procedures has been reached.

web page

But HGH testing is being held up..since August 2011..over the issue of who will be the final arbiter in particular situations dealing with the testing process or the results.
....the players and NFLPA want a neutral arbitration to decide disputed cases.
....Roger Goodell wants to be the final arbiter in disputed cases.




Yeah I agree mac, I definitely think they are making this a bargaining chip.
Posted By: Lemmys_Wart Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 02:35 PM
My wife and I have enough respect for each other to never strike one another like little children who can't solve their issues with words. If someone decides to strike their spouse, regardless of gender, there are some serious other issues there.
Posted By: Millcreek Dawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 02:42 PM
j/c

If I am Gordon's lawyer, I threaten the NFL with a law suit based on test B negating test A with a jury. Then I negotiate a suspension settlement to 6 games or under. I am sure he can bring in a ton of experts to prove the test failure rate. Maybe this is why it is drawn out?
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 03:24 PM
Quote:

Good point.

Too bad you didn't get the point about Rice's innocence or guilt doesn't make Gordon innocent of his violations.



I'm pretty certain that Rice and Gordon are both guilty of something.. the discussion is (or should be) about the equity of their respective punishments.
Posted By: 3rd_and_20 Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 03:50 PM
Quote:

j/c

Personally, I'm to the point where this whole thing has become annoying. It's overkill and it has stretched WAY beyond the time frame it should have.




I agree a zillion percent.

I'll be really mad if they kick him out for the full year after all this. You know?
Posted By: eotab Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 03:58 PM
Didn't go back to the old thread. It was announced today (heard on NFL Network if that counts) Results from the Arbitrator will be in anywhere between 1-4 weeks We might not know until the season is ready to start...Until then he practices with the team.

jmho but a disservice to the Browns ability to prepare themselves for the season I think.
Posted By: Punchsmack Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 04:09 PM
Delay it as long as they want. I hope his lawyers are ready to file a lawsuit in Ohio court that would put the suspension on hold (because Ohio drug testing law differs from the NFLs - if that's true).

I hope we see a Williams brother situation (well, if Josh is suspended and not cleared 100%). Meaning, he's suspended but won't serve anything for 2+ years, but by they, the NFL will reduce to almost nothing.
Posted By: YTownBrownsFan Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 04:11 PM
Quote:


jmho but a disservice to the Browns ability to prepare themselves for the season I think.





I agree. This should have been scheduled for much earlier in the off-season. If they suspend him at the start of the season, that means that he would miss. automatically, the whole off-season next year as well.

That is another reason why I feel like a reduced, or eliminated suspension is coming.
Posted By: Punchsmack Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 04:16 PM
Or the NFL wants to wait until the last possible second so his canceled or reduced suspension announcement will get no attention because the start of the season excitement/noise.

Posted By: FreeAgent Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 04:28 PM
I thought they would have wanted this to go away. Don't know how to take the extended long time to make a ruling. Obviously if it was open and shut the ruling would have been out by now.

Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.
Posted By: PerfectSpiral Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 05:16 PM
Looks like the NFL powers to be want to see how Johnny Football and Josh Gordon work together before making a decision that could loose revenue.
Posted By: eotab Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 05:33 PM
pretty sure season starts and ends in March...he misses the games I think he can apply to reinstate for March when the 2015 season starts.

jmhguess
Posted By: Damanshot Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 05:35 PM
Quote:

Looks like the NFL powers to be want to see how Johnny Football and Josh Gordon work together before making a decision that could loose revenue.




LOL Funny, I said something similar and was pretty much told I was nuts..
Posted By: PrplPplEater Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 05:38 PM
Quote:



...the story above broke about the same time news broke that Josh Gordon may have tested positive for marijuana and could be facing a year suspension.

Just a coincidence....?






Not a chance.
Posted By: Millcreek Dawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 05:47 PM
Quote:

Or the NFL wants to wait until the last possible second so his canceled or reduced suspension announcement will get no attention because the start of the season excitement/noise.






Like I said before, if I was representing Gordon my trump card would be HIPAA, maybe a deal is in the works?


Drug Testing: What are the rules surrounding confidentiality and sharing of drug test results?


Generally, drug test results, like all medical information about employees, should be kept confidential. Drug test results should be filed in a confidential medical file separate from the general employee file.

The department that receives drug test results should share results only on a need-to-know basis. For example, sharing drug-test results with front-line managers is often unnecessary beyond stating whether the results are pass or fail.

State drug testing laws or privacy laws may apply to drug test results either specifically or generally as a matter of personal privacy. Also, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) may apply to drug test results depending on the facts involved. Employers should work with their attorneys to analyze relevance of these laws to drug test results.

Drug test results may also be critical in determining eligibility for state- and employer-sponsored benefits. Many laws recognize these situations. The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations on testing procedures permit the release of drug test results for investigatory proceedings and other matters of necessity as described under 49 C.F.R. §40.323. See also, U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) resources at Drug-Free Workplace Policy Builder, Section 7: Drug Testing.

Examples of matters necessitating disclosure of test results include unemployment eligibility determination, workers’ compensation claims and disability benefits. Depending on the applicable laws, consented release may not even be required. However, a conservative approach, due to the various laws that may apply, would be to obtain written consent for release from the applicant or employee when possible. When not possible, employers should consult with an attorney before releasing information without signed authorization.
- See more at: http://www.shrm.org/templatestools/hrqa/...h.OEJAfKua.dpuf
Posted By: PerfectSpiral Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 06:37 PM
Quote:

Quote:

Looks like the NFL powers to be want to see how Johnny Football and Josh Gordon work together before making a decision that could loose revenue.




LOL Funny, I said something similar and was pretty much told I was nuts..




Then call me nuts also. If anyone for an instance thinks the final decision on Josh Gordon won't be based at all on revenue and getting JF on NFL prime time ASAP, they are the nuts here.
Posted By: PerfectSpiral Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 06:45 PM
If Josh or his lawyers leaked any info into the public domain, a HIPPA law suit won't fly.
Posted By: OrlandoDawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 07:05 PM
I was thinking the same thing, the leak of that information would have to be uncovered if that was to be any sort of viable lawsuit. If it was the NFL that leaked, watch out lol
Posted By: Damanshot Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 07:27 PM
Quote:

If Josh or his lawyers leaked any info into the public domain, a HIPPA law suit won't fly.




And I'll say it again, why would Josh or his Lawyers leak info that would be a detriment Gordon?
Posted By: clwb419 Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 07:40 PM
Quote:

I don't understand people saying he needs life help that he's so much out of control. I just don't see that. Alittle pot (so what) and slightly over o.8 shouldn't have been driving but haven't we all (or most) after 1 or 2. Anyway I really just don't get all the help he needs the he's so out of control talk. Or is it just me thinking that? I mean does he really need professinal help for smoking weed and having a couple of drinks??




I'd guess it is that he's got the potential to earn a hundred millions dollars or more (between football and sponsorship) over his career and he keeps doing things to put that in jeopardy. I do think someone needs to have a serious chat with the guy just to make sure he really understand that...

And, a couple drinks? .09 for a 225lb guy is the equivalent of 9 12oz beers over a 5.5 hour period. Had he had only a couple beers, we'd not be talking about this.
Posted By: PerfectSpiral Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 07:40 PM
Quote:

Quote:

If Josh or his lawyers leaked any info into the public domain, a HIPPA law suit won't fly.




And I'll say it again, why would Josh or his Lawyers leak info that would be a detriment Gordon?




They may if they wanted public opinion to join in the fight against the NFL. Which is what seemed to happen. Then enter Ray Rice's 2 game suspension for beating a women unconscious. More public opinion... Ytown is so correct, this is a PR nightmare for the NFL.
Posted By: Damanshot Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 07:50 PM
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

If Josh or his lawyers leaked any info into the public domain, a HIPPA law suit won't fly.




And I'll say it again, why would Josh or his Lawyers leak info that would be a detriment Gordon?




They may if they wanted public opinion to join in the fight against the NFL. Which is what seemed to happen. Then enter Ray Rice's 2 game suspension for beating a women unconscious. More public opinion... Ytown is so correct, this is a PR nightmare for the NFL.




The only way that works out for him in terms of a possible suspension is if the NFL never finds out he or his agents or lawyers leaked it.
Posted By: YTownBrownsFan Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 08:37 PM
Quote:

pretty sure season starts and ends in March...he misses the games I think he can apply to reinstate for March when the 2015 season starts.

jmhguess





I could swear that it is a calendar year, not the start if the next league year.
Posted By: Damanshot Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 09:59 PM
Quote:

Quote:

pretty sure season starts and ends in March...he misses the games I think he can apply to reinstate for March when the 2015 season starts.

jmhguess





I could swear that it is a calendar year, not the start if the next league year.




I believe you are correct Ytown,, That's why they wanted it to be handed down before training camp if it was going to be at all. That way, he wouldn't miss camp next season. At least I belive that's the way it is.
Posted By: Jester Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/05/14 10:16 PM
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Looks like the NFL powers to be want to see how Johnny Football and Josh Gordon work together before making a decision that could loose revenue.




LOL Funny, I said something similar and was pretty much told I was nuts..




Then call me nuts also. If anyone for an instance thinks the final decision on Josh Gordon won't be based at all on revenue and getting JF on NFL prime time ASAP, they are the nuts here.




Now we know why Manziel is starting to get 1st team reps
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 01:19 AM
Quote:

jmho but a disservice to the Browns ability to prepare themselves for the season I think.




Yep, it is a disservice to the Browns. If Gordon would NOT have broken the rules numerous times, the Browns would NOT be in this position.

It amazes me how you guys put the cart before the horse.
Posted By: superbowldogg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 02:00 AM
Browns are bracing themselves for at least eight games without Josh Gordon


http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2014/08/browns_are_bracing_themselves.html#incart_2box

Browns are bracing themselves for at least eight games without Josh Gordon



CLEVELAND, Ohio -- The Browns are bracing themselves for at least an eight-game suspension for receiver Josh Gordon, league sources told cleveland.com.

Gordon's appeal hearing wrapped up Monday afternoon in New York City, and the decision on his indefinite ban could take anywhere from one to three weeks, a source said. If he wins, he'll resume his career without interruption, and if he loses, he'll be banished from the team and the league for at least a year.

But the two sides can also hammer out a settlement, and that's what the Browns are hoping for. Realistically, the best-case scenario would probably be about eight games, a source said.

But the Browns certainly aren't counting on it. They know that no NFL player has ever won an appeal based on second-hand smoke and that Gordon will be hard-pressed to end up with anything less than the indefinite ban.

But Gordon's legal team drove home the point that Gordon has tested negative 70 times since his rookie year in 2012 and that he barely tested positive for marijuana this time around.

In the event Gordon's ban is reduced to eight games, he'd be eligible to return Nov. 6 at Cincinnati, a Thursday night game on NFL Network. The final eight contests include three AFC North contests, two against the Bengals and one against the Ravens in the finale.

Of course, Gordon would have to stay clean during his time away, and efforts are underway to make sure that he has the right support system around him during the ban.

In the meantime, Gordon is practicing with the team, making big plays in practice -- including several big catches during a challenge period at the end of Tuesday's session -- and gearing up for Saturday's preseason opener in Detroit.

"As frustrating as it is for Josh, I think he's handled it well,'' said coach Mike Pettine. "He's been practicing hard, giving good effort, finishing plays. Assuming if we don't hear anything, then he'll be out there Saturday."

Receivers coach Mike McDaniel said working around the Gordon uncertainty hasn't been difficult.

"I try to stick to my job,'' he said. "My job is to develop players, so it really hasn't been an issue for me, and I just go and work on his craft with him. He's been very diligent when he's been here, and for the person, and for the whole team, we hope for the best and just wait for the process to get through itself and take care of itself.''

He said there's so many reps in training camp, that Gordon's aren't detracting from anyone else's.

"He fits very fluidly in that process because guys do need rest anyway,'' he said. "He needs to keep developing his game because at some point in time, he's going to put a Browns jersey on, and he's going to have to be productive. He's a very young player. It doesn't really hinder anybody else. He gets the most out of his reps during practice.''

Despite the looming suspension and missing practice to attend the appeal hearing, Gordon has been on point, McDaniel said.

"To his credit, he's been very, very good about coming into work and making it about football,'' he said. "In his mind, he wants to be as good as there is, so when you're showing plays of other people at his position doing things that he hasn't put in his game yet, he's interested and very competitive to work on that. I've had no qualms about how he's worked with me.''

A former Yale receiver himself himself, McDaniel has coached the likes of Texans receiver Andre Johnson, who led the NFL in receiving yards (1,575) yards and receptions (115) when McDaniel was with him in 2008.

"(Gordon's) as good as I've ever seen personally,'' McDaniel said. "I've been fortunate to be around some really great receivers, Rod Smith, Andre Johnson, Pierre Garcon. In terms of naturally talented and catching the ball, he's as good any one of them, and if you're in those categories, you're an excellent football player.''

Despite the fact Gordon led the NFL with 1,646 yards last year in 14 games, McDaniel feels his upside is tremendous.

"He's a very unique talent in that his ceiling, there's not much higher than that,'' said McDaniel. "At the end of the day, he led the league in receiving. If you extrapolated it to 16 games, it would've been the second-highest total in the history of the game, and he has a lot of room to grow as a route runner.''

"He is a very natural receiver, (the way he) catches it. He's just learning the nuances of NFL offenses because the best receivers are the ones that can get open in the timing of the play, so you have to kind of get a clock in your head of when to get open and how to do it against different techniques. That's our primary focus every day, but he's gotten a lot better going against these great corners.''

McDaniel has been showing Gordon game tape of players such as Johnson, and has found him a willing pupil. He, too, heard the reports of Gordon sometimes loafing in practice, but hasn't witnessed it during their time together.

"You show them the picture of 'okay, this is the way that the great ones practice,''' he said. "He as best he can has attempted to do that and that's always a work in progress when you're dealing with a person that everything's been easy his whole life athletically. So he right now is working harder than he's ever worked in his career and he hasn't reached his ceiling of work ethic. He'll continue to grow as he gets older and progresses as a football player.''

If Gordon does have to go, McDaniel hopes he can come back better than before.

"In anything in life, things happen and you can be regretful, you can have a bunch of emotions,'' he said. "At the end of the day, it's how he responds. And you can use something like this to define you as a person and your character. Wherever the process leads, I hope that he uses all of this to improve himself as a man, just like you'd like you've want anybody to respond to any sort of tribulation.''
Posted By: YTownBrownsFan Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 03:32 AM
Everyone keeps writing that his defense is based on second hand smoke ... but I really don't think that was anything except the PR side of the case. His defense is based on the discrepancy between the test results of the A and B split sample. Period. That is where the case will be won or lost.
Posted By: waterdawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 01:30 PM
Goodjoke and the NFL come out of this looking like the joke they are .. So you cheap shot your wife and get two weeks , take a hit on a joint and get a year ? This administration is just as out of touch with the bulk of American people as the folks in Washington are .
Posted By: bigf00t Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 01:38 PM
I agree.

The problem is that it sounds like all the B sample is used for, by the NFL anyways, is to confirm the presence of HTC. So even if it had .01ng then it confirms the A. Sounds silly to me. And Ohio labor law, and most other employers and world standards, actually is opposite of the NFL and would take the B sample value and say its a negative test. It really is a conundrum for the arbitrator.
Posted By: mac Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 01:43 PM
Quote:

Goodjoke and the NFL come out of this looking like the joke they are .. So you cheap shot your wife and get two weeks , take a hit on a joint and get a year ? This administration is just as out of touch with the bulk of American people as the folks in Washington are .




Should we be surprised that the NFL out of touch like the folks in Washington?

Roger Goodell is the son of a "politician"...really, he is. His father, Charles Goodell, was a member of the house of reps for NY and later a NY Senator.



Posted By: mgh888 Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 01:46 PM
j/c - having read the article on what Josh can do legally in the OH courts to challenge the NFL - 8 games suspension doesn't seem a very good compromise given the negative press surrounding Goddell and the NFL. 4-6 games would seem a reasonable compromise given Josh's strong position. And if you don't think Josh's position is strong .... your kidding yourself. If this was an open/shut case - then the NFL would not have taken this long to announce a resolution.
Posted By: OrlandoDawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 02:14 PM
Quote:

.... If this was an open/shut case - then the NFL would not have taken this long to announce a resolution.




This. If this was solely about the letter of the 'NFL law', this wouldn't even be still ongoing. The fact that there isn't an answer yet to me says there is something else at work here beyond the PR nightmare the NFL is getting right now.
Posted By: mac Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 02:15 PM
jc...

While the NFL might argue that they only use the test of the "B" sample to confirm the presence of HTC, the fact is, the NFL does and did test Gordon's "B" sample for the amount of HTC ...just as they do for the "A" sample.

For the NFL to argue that there "B" test is not and should not be considered a test of the level of HTC...the fact remains, the NFL did use Gordon's "B" sample to determine if he was over the limit...otherwise, no one would even know that a number value was given for the testing of the "B" sample.

If the NFL is going to do two tests on a player's urine, the results of both test values should be considered.

The question could be asked...Why is the NFL testing the value of both the "A" sample and "B" sample if all they are doing is trying to confirm the presence of the banned substance in the "B" sample.

Could it be that the NFL's testing of the "A" sample varies greatly, therefore the NFL tests the "B" sample to see if their "A" sample test results are accurate...

Why is the NFL testing the "B" sample for the amount of HTC?
Posted By: OrlandoDawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 02:21 PM
I think if nothing else this has opened a lot of questions about their testing. I think somewhere I read that they actually use a different test on the B sample that is more accurate, why do that if you are in effect ignoring the result if its not over the limit?
Posted By: CHSDawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 02:39 PM
Quote:

Quote:

.... If this was an open/shut case - then the NFL would not have taken this long to announce a resolution.




This. If this was solely about the letter of the 'NFL law', this wouldn't even be still ongoing. The fact that there isn't an answer yet to me says there is something else at work here beyond the PR nightmare the NFL is getting right now.




That's not necessarily true. The NFL allows you to defend yourself before you're suspended. So by the letters of the NFL Law, we're still on course. That said, I think Josh gets off, and I don't think they'll do a compromise.
Posted By: DIEHARD Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 02:39 PM
j/c

If JG had passed his last 70 tests, I have to wonder what the results were of the previous test before this failure and how many days prior was it taken? So for example, if he were tested one day and passed...and if he really did smoke that night, would his system be down to 16 ng by the next test only a few days later? Honestly, i'm not a scientist to know how this works....

His defense team could have been engaged with scientists that would state for a man of JG's size, there is no way his levels would be that low if he smoked 3-4 days earlier. Maybe, just maybe....the second hand smoke defense is the only thing that actually makes sense. Although, there is strong evidence that he's have to be baking in a closed car for that to take effect.

I personally think the NFL is taking so much time to craft a positive message and good story out of why they are throwing these results out because the testing is flawed. They could possibly be engaged with the NFLPA to work to change the testing rules and that will be a part of the outcome.

It makes no sense to have a reduced suspension....he's half guilty? It's gotta be all or nothing. Depending on the scientific evidence, I think he plays all year.

Until he gets suspended for the DUI
Posted By: CHSDawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 02:42 PM
Don't worry, he has money, he won't be found guilty of a DUI. He'll either get a plea to reckless driving or he'll plead "No Contest" which means he's guilty, but with the NFL rules the way they're worded, they can't suspend him for it.
Posted By: OrlandoDawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 02:45 PM
j/c

Also hasn't he been regularly tested since that one failed test and has he not passed all of those? Or once he fails does the testing stop, which wouldn't make sense to me. I guess there could be a lot of moving pieces to this whole process so who knows really what all is going on.
Posted By: no_logo_required Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 03:07 PM
please note that the "passed 70 tests" was just as much rumor as that he missed the test or that it was a diluted sample or the A & B thing going on now.

the NFL cannot actually tell us what is going on, so everything is just leaked rumor and a ton has been untrue to this point, so I'm not sure I want to just blindly believe anything.

that said, I hope he has passed that many tests.
Posted By: eotab Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 03:34 PM
Vers not going to nitpick with you - but they knew all this crap by the draft May. It could have been resolved by training camp 3 months later. But it was not. This is not about Gordon's choices its about the NFL cowtowing to the Steelers and Pats...all the while seemingly to screw us whenever they can.

This is after the fact. If it was Steelers and/or Pats...this would have been done.

jmho Aluminum hatted if it may...lol
Posted By: YTownBrownsFan Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 03:51 PM
Quote:

I agree.

The problem is that it sounds like all the B sample is used for, by the NFL anyways, is to confirm the presence of HTC. So even if it had .01ng then it confirms the A. Sounds silly to me. And Ohio labor law, and most other employers and world standards, actually is opposite of the NFL and would take the B sample value and say its a negative test. It really is a conundrum for the arbitrator.




Plus, the NFL would almost certainly lose a court case based on the facts as we know them, under Ohio state law.
Posted By: mac Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 04:11 PM
As a lifelong Browns fan...I get so tired of Goodell thinking nothing of dumping on the Browns...

I seriously doubt that if Gordon were on the Patriots or Steelers, that a 16.0 ng/ml followed by a 13.6 ng/ml would been called a violation by Goodell.

The only way the Browns are going to get any respect from Roger Goodell is if Jimmy Haslam "demands it"...with the support of a majority of the owners in the NFL.

Goodell still works for the NFL owners...that is how a case such as Ray Rice's ends up being a slap on the hand for the Ravens and their owner, Steve Bisciotti.

The Browns franchise, with a weakened owner, facing his own legal issues, can't demand much from the NFL and he is unlikely to get much support from a majority of the owners.

Had Gordon been playing for the Patriots, Steelers or Ravens, (imo) we would not be talking about our star receiver being suspended.
Posted By: PDR Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 04:40 PM
Quote:

Had Gordon been playing for the Patriots, Steelers or Ravens, (imo) we would not be talking about our star receiver being suspended.




Yeah, this is just the NFL out to get the Browns.
Posted By: Damanshot Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 04:41 PM
Quote:

As a lifelong Browns fan...I get so tired of Goodell thinking nothing of dumping on the Browns...




I bet you that every team has fans that feel the exact same way.... Perhaps this should read:

As a lifelong (insert team name) fan...I get so tired of Goodell thinking nothing of dumping on the (insert team name)...


To some, that's accurate.
Posted By: OrlandoDawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 04:50 PM
j/c

To me this has nothing to do about it being the Browns. I think it has a lot to do with many things going on right now....I wonder if anything to do with Irsay is having an affect on this? Because lets be honest, that guy has way more issues that are more serious than Gordon, so what is the NFL going to do about him?
Posted By: FloridaFan Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 05:03 PM
Quote:



The Browns franchise, with a weakened owner, facing his own legal issues, can't demand much from the NFL and he is unlikely to get much support from a majority of the owners.





Bet Irsay and Jones might be willing.
Posted By: eotab Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 05:44 PM
Well I wouldn't go that far with the conspiracy Mac.... my point was the due process If he gets a 1 year suspension from that day forth...and its just prior to the opener it is sort of making us pay. If they take 4 weeks to look at the evidence and then state 1 year suspension means they ignored the evidence. And basically go by the RULE is the RULE which if that is the case then RULE NOW! not 1 week not 4 weeks.

Now if this is because some break is coming - no penalty or a lightened penalty. Ok then I see it being just. But to extend the time sort of a punishment for "APPEALING" then come up with the same results just a sham in my opinion.

Getting off...sometimes the Steelers close relationship might even go the other way at times...as in go ahead use my guy as an example and throw the book at him...but usually that would be somebody they were going to not rely on. Off the top of my head I don't remember names or anything.

It a tough subject. definitely...nothing to draw Mason Dixon lines though.

jmho
Posted By: Frenchy Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 07:40 PM
IMO I think he gets nothing. I think they will announce it Friday night at 5:00pm, to let it simmer down over the weekend.

Also, how many tests has he taken since the failed one? That's like maybe 4 months time, I'm sure he has been tested since then right? Or did the tests stop once he failed? Has he had a free pass to smoke the last 4 months?
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 08:19 PM
I honestly don't see any way that he gets nothing. As publicized as this has been, and with the other things like DUIs still floating out there, they have to give him something just to save face.
Posted By: dawg531 Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 09:21 PM
Quote:

I honestly don't see any way that he gets nothing. As publicized as this has been, and with the other things like DUIs still floating out there, they have to give him something just to save face.




The NFL prob is hoping that Gordon will compromise...but if he wont, its gonna be interesting from a PR standpoint for them.
Posted By: bbrowns32 Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 09:24 PM
Quote:

But to extend the time sort of a punishment for "APPEALING" then come up with the same results just a sham in my opinion.




To announce a suspension now, punishes (likely justified) the player. To announce near the start of the season (?) penalizes the team. Unjust and unacceptable...
Posted By: PDR Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 09:30 PM
Quote:

But to extend the time sort of a punishment for "APPEALING" then come up with the same results just a sham in my opinion.




I don't see how it's a sham.

Let's just say for the sake of argument that everything that has been reported (i.e. the A/B levels in Gordon's samples)...the NFL has a pretty big decision on its hands.

If they suspend Gordon for a year, they're going to catch hell in the media, mainly due to the proximity to the Rice suspension and the rapidly changing opinions on marijuana use.

If they let him off, there's going to be a bit of a firestorm there, as well. Maybe even some lawsuits.

I would take my time on this one if I were them.

As far as the length of the process...if you want to blame someone, blame Gordon, not the NFL. He's the one that put him/us in this situation.

If I had to guess, I'd say 8 games. It's a pretty safe middle ground for them.
Report: Browns steeling themselves for 8-game Gordon suspension
By Josh Katzowitz | NFL Writer
August 6, 2014 9:20 am CT

Somehow, the Browns still don't know how long they'll miss standout receiver Josh Gordon. Despite the fact his suspension was first reported in May, the appeals hearing finally occurred last Friday and last Monday, and the decision on his eligibility is supposed to be announced in one to three weeks.

But there might be some good news on the horizon. Well, good news compared to what the original news was.

Instead of a year-long suspension, the Browns reportedly are steeling themselves for the NFL to suspend Gordon for eight games, according to the Cleveland Plain Dealer's Mary Kay Cabot.

During his appeal, Gordon reportedly argued that his latest failed drug test was due to second-hand marijuana smoke and that his failed exam was just barely over the NFL's limit (one sample was, anyway. The other specimen the NFL test apparently was just under the limit).

If Gordon, in fact, does only get eight games, he'd be eligible to return Nov. 6 on a Thursday night game vs. Cincinnati. But missing the first half of the season also insures that Gordon wouldn't face the Steelers at all.

Gordon, though, has been getting plenty of work in practice, and reportedly, he's been impressive while on the field.

"As frustrating as it is for Josh, I think he's handled it well," said coach Mike Pettine. "He's been practicing hard, giving good effort, finishing plays. Assuming if we don't hear anything, then he'll be out there Saturday."

Saturday is when the Browns play their first preseason game of the year vs. the Lions, and even though it appears Gordon will miss at least half the season, Cleveland still is going to give its star receiver a number of reps.
Posted By: YTownBrownsFan Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 09:54 PM
I see no reason for him to accept 8 games.

He has a great case under state law. It is a textbook case under state law. It is a case he can win.

This is very much like the Sherman case ..... where he actually tested above the limit for a performance enhancing drug ..... but because of a chain of custody issue, he won his appeal. He won on a technicality. Gordon actually has a lesser technicality to have to overcome. Sherman had to prove that the chain of custody was violated to the extent that there was no way whatsoever that his sample could be guaranteed nt to have been tampered with. Gordon has proof that his 2 samples did not test the same, using 2 halves of the same sample. I am sure that his lawyers introduced all kinds of evidence regarding allowable and acceptable limits for error in the tests, and showed that this discrepancy was outside those limits. Gordon may have smoked pot, but the rules of the NFL still have to be in accord with state and federal laws. If they are not, then they are the lowest of the 3 in order of enforcement. Federal laws are 1st, then state laws, then the rules of the NFL. Ohio state law says that in the event that a split A/B sample is collected, and B is used to confirm the A testing, that the lower of the 2 results must be used. The NFL rule is the reverse, in that any trace whatsoever of a banned substance in the retest is cause for suspension. State law overrules NFL rules. Gordon would not have been subjected to any other tests, as I understand it, if he had not "failed" that initial tests, so if there was no failure on that test, by state law standards, then there cannot be any further test results used against him.

I think that he stands a great chance of having this suspension overturned. If it is not, then it goes to court, and is tried in an Ohio court, under Ohio law, where the outcome is pretty clear according to the law.

It drives me crazy when I read articles about how Gordon's lawyers are arguing second hand smoke ,,,,, because that is the PR side of this. I doubt that they even bring up 2nd hand smoke in their hearing, because that has completely been rejected by the NFL as a defense. That was PR for Gordon's sake. This case stands on the discrepancy in the initial test that caused this suspension in the 1st place, and whether that test was conducted, and the results were applied, in accordance with Ohio employment laws. They were not, as I understand the laws, and if they have to g to court, I would suspect that it would takeno time to get that kind of ruling .... especially since there is already precedent. .
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 10:16 PM
I blame both for each of their parts.

Gordon for putting himself in this position and the NFL for dragging this out. We know for a fact they've known about this since the first week of May. We have no idea how much earlier they knew about it.
Posted By: anarchy2day Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 10:21 PM
Quote:

Quote:



The Browns franchise, with a weakened owner, facing his own legal issues, can't demand much from the NFL and he is unlikely to get much support from a majority of the owners.





Bet Irsay and Jones might be willing.




Posted By: Jester Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 10:49 PM
Quote:

I honestly don't see any way that he gets nothing. As publicized as this has been, and with the other things like DUIs still floating out there, they have to give him something just to save face.




The MJ and the DUI are separate issues.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Gordon have the MJ violation dropped because of the B sample then get a 4-8 game suspension for the DUI.
Posted By: archbolddawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 10:51 PM
j/c

I am not an attorney, and I didn't sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night. Okay?

But, if others have mentioned - if it was a cut and dried decision, we'd know by now.

I have a feeling the nfl is thinking "okay, we've been challenged and we can't change the facts................how do we weasel out of this and save face?"

Maybe I'm way wrong

And further - IF Gordon gets a reprieve - he'd better toe the line to the max.
Posted By: Ballpeen Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 10:55 PM
Quote:

As a lifelong Browns fan...I get so tired of Goodell thinking nothing of dumping on the Browns...

I seriously doubt that if Gordon were on the Patriots or Steelers, that a 16.0 ng/ml followed by a 13.6 ng/ml would been called a violation by Goodell.

The only way the Browns are going to get any respect from Roger Goodell is if Jimmy Haslam "demands it"...with the support of a majority of the owners in the NFL.

Goodell still works for the NFL owners...that is how a case such as Ray Rice's ends up being a slap on the hand for the Ravens and their owner, Steve Bisciotti.

The Browns franchise, with a weakened owner, facing his own legal issues, can't demand much from the NFL and he is unlikely to get much support from a majority of the owners.

Had Gordon been playing for the Patriots, Steelers or Ravens, (imo) we would not be talking about our star receiver being suspended.






You have been making some sense, but this post sets you back again.

This isn't something against the Browns. In actuality, I think the league is helping the Browns. Otherwise, Gordon would already be done for the year and there wouldn't be talk of a lesser deal.
Posted By: predator16 Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 11:07 PM
Quote:

Quote:

I honestly don't see any way that he gets nothing. As publicized as this has been, and with the other things like DUIs still floating out there, they have to give him something just to save face.




The MJ and the DUI are separate issues.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Gordon have the MJ violation dropped because of the B sample then get a 4-8 game suspension for the DUI.




First time OVI under the new CBA is a one game suspension.
Posted By: anarchy2day Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 11:41 PM
Quote:

j/c

I am not an attorney, and I didn't sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night. Okay?

But, if others have mentioned - if it was a cut and dried decision, we'd know by now.

I have a feeling the nfl is thinking "okay, we've been challenged and we can't change the facts................how do we weasel out of this and save face?"

Maybe I'm way wrong

And further - IF Gordon gets a reprieve - he'd better toe the line to the max.




I think you're right. My take is that the NFL has to be cautious in how they proceed because there's an ostrich egg coming at their faces and they're unable to move. They're going to take as long as they can to construct something they find isn't palpable to anybody. They're probably asking political pollsters to conduct focus groups on how to proceed.
Posted By: Jester Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 11:49 PM
Good to hear. But...

What is an OVI? I am not familiar with that abbreviation.
Are we sure that this is his 1st OVI?
Posted By: Jester Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 11:51 PM
When I read your post, I misread that you were quoting Arch. I thought you were quoting yourself and replying "I think your right". Thought I would share because when I realized my mistake it made me chuckle a little bit.
Posted By: E.Ryze19 Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/06/14 11:53 PM
J/C

I want to know how they need so much time to decide. There was the charge, and then a lengthy appeal process. What gives?

IMO, they are desperately trying to cover their butts. Holmes of the Steelers was caught with possesion and admitted to smoking, and was let play anyway. Those who think the Rooney's have no clout are fools. Over the years they have used it. They had a player shoot a gun at a police helicopter and get off scott free. Lambert was coaxed into shooting a guys cow, those coaxing him were kidding, and amazed that he did it. He got no punishment.

I don't think he will get the full punishment, but, I do think Goodell wants to use him as an example to make himself look good.

I still believe the extended decision time is bogus/ JMHO
Posted By: anarchy2day Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 12:38 AM
Quote:

When I read your post, I misread that you were quoting Arch. I thought you were quoting yourself and replying "I think your right". Thought I would share because when I realized my mistake it made me chuckle a little bit.




Well, it would be odd for me to say that. Although... I do think I'm right... every time. I'm usually right about that.
Posted By: anarchy2day Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 12:46 AM
Quote:

J/C

I want to know how they need so much time to decide. There was the charge, and then a lengthy appeal process. What gives?

IMO, they are desperately trying to cover their butts. Holmes of the Steelers was caught with possession and admitted to smoking, and was let play anyway. Those who think the Rooney's have no clout are fools. Over the years they have used it. They had a player shoot a gun at a police helicopter and get off scott free. Lambert was coaxed into shooting a guys cow, those coaxing him were kidding, and amazed that he did it. He got no punishment.

I don't think he will get the full punishment, but, I do think Goodell wants to use him as an example to make himself look good.

I still believe the extended decision time is bogus/ JMHO




I think that's almost universally thought of that way. The NFL is taking it's time tie the rope into a noose to slip around their own necks. Can you really blame them though? In their position, would you want to be eager about it?

I also think they need to slow down on trying to implement these fantastical ideas like 15-yd line XP kicks and moving the kickoff to the 50-yd line. Move the kickoff back to the 30-yd line (the 35-yd line experiment has been a disaster). These rules changes aren't making the game any better, just making it look like social experimentation on hamsters gone awry.
Posted By: archbolddawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 01:06 AM
Quote:

Good to hear. But...

What is an OVI? I am not familiar with that abbreviation.
Are we sure that this is his 1st OVI?




OVI - operating a vehicle impaired. In many states, that's become the new "norm" for a charge, instead of DUI.....driving under the influence.
Posted By: CHSDawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 01:41 AM
Quote:

Quote:

Good to hear. But...

What is an OVI? I am not familiar with that abbreviation.
Are we sure that this is his 1st OVI?




OVI - operating a vehicle impaired. In many states, that's become the new "norm" for a charge, instead of DUI.....driving under the influence.




If he can weasel his way out of a drug test then a DUI/OVI is no problem. He'll pay some money, do some "community service" and get it down to reckless driving. That's what most people with his privilege do.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 02:01 AM
Peachy.

Do you guys hear what you are saying? <<sigh>>
Posted By: archbolddawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 02:22 AM
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Good to hear. But...

What is an OVI? I am not familiar with that abbreviation.
Are we sure that this is his 1st OVI?




OVI - operating a vehicle impaired. In many states, that's become the new "norm" for a charge, instead of DUI.....driving under the influence.




If he can weasel his way out of a drug test then a DUI/OVI is no problem. He'll pay some money, do some "community service" and get it down to reckless driving. That's what most people with his privilege do.




Eh, it all depends. Depends on what? Where did it happen, first of all. Who's the judge, secondly.

First time offender? It's not uncommon for them to get / plea to a lesser charge if it's in an urban setting.

Out in the country, where crime doesn't happen much, and you get a judge that wants to prove how tough he is? Different story,

First time offender - in a city/urban area? $5000 gets joe blow off the hook - in a similar situation I must add.
Posted By: Jester Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 02:51 AM
Thanks. I don't understand why they keep changing what they call things. I think a lot of times, it's because someone is trying to justify some grant they received.

Regardless, even if Josh gets this down to reckless driving in the courts, the NFL can still treat it as an OVI.
Posted By: CHSDawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 02:56 AM
Really? I did not read that in the section that someone linked here. Care to elaborate?

@Arch, not surprising that we have different views on the court, but since this is the "Pure Football" section I'll just bow out before we got on a 20 page tangent about the court system
Posted By: 1JohnnyG Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 03:02 AM
Quote:


And further - IF Gordon gets a reprieve - he'd better toe the line to the max.




Aye. There's the problem then, laddie.

Maybe we can convince him to try Macanudos instead??
Posted By: Jester Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 03:14 AM
The NFL has made it clear on multiple occasions in the past that the punishment they hand out is not directly linked to the decisions made in the courts.
Posted By: 1JohnnyG Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 03:21 AM
Quote:

Good to hear. But...

What is an OVI? I am not familiar with that abbreviation. ...




Lemme try. I'm great with these emoticons.
Lessee, Oddly Visual Information.
Ummm, Omnipotently Viscuous Infrastructure.
No? Officially Venereal Infection.
Ah, Oscillating Ventrical Infarction.
Hmm. Ostensibly Voracious Instigation.
How 'bouts, Ostentatiously Varangian Interiordecorator. (Must be a blonde)
Uh, Occasionally Vacationally Incontinent. (If in Mexico)
OK then. Ovarian Vasectomy Illiteracy. (Feminists only)
Olympic Vestigial Illustration (thems is no Greek statues from olden days).

Nothing? Sorry. That's all I could find in the Thesaurus.

Which reminds me. Is there another word for similie?
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 03:25 AM
Similitude?
Posted By: CHSDawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 03:26 AM
Quote:

The NFL has made it clear on multiple occasions in the past that the punishment they hand out is not directly linked to the decisions made in the courts.




Yes, but the NFL rules say that he wouldn't get suspended if he did have a DUI (The coming rules say he would though), I also believe there is no precedence for this type of suspension. I just don't see him being suspended for this.
Posted By: YTownBrownsFan Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 03:31 AM
How could you forget Obsequious Valentine Interactions?

A simile compares 2 things through a connecting work, like "Red as a rose"

A synonym is a word that has a similar meaning as another, Like mad, angry, irate, etc.
Posted By: 1JohnnyG Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 03:35 AM
Quote:

How could you forget Obsequious Valentine Interactions?
...




Oh man! Your Thesaurus is bigger than mine.

I have, however, been Obsequious, Purple, and Clarevoyant, but that didn't win this particular Web ACRONYM contest. I yield to you.
Posted By: 1JohnnyG Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 03:36 AM
Quote:

Similitude?




That doesn't start with an "O", a "V", or an "I".
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 03:38 AM
Sorry, I was answering if there was another word for a simile. Not sure if my word was right or not anyway, so no big deal.
Posted By: 1JohnnyG Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 03:40 AM
Quote:

A synonym is a word that has a similar meaning as another, Like mad, angry, irate, etc.




Can't fool me. Synonym is something you spread on toast with butter and sugar.

Like I was born yesterday ...
Posted By: 1JohnnyG Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 03:45 AM
Quote:

Sorry, I was answering if there was another word for a simile. Not sure if my word was right or not anyway, so no big deal.




You're cool, dude. I shouldn't type after 500 ml of White Zinfandel.

But I like your reply: simile / similitude. Might be more visual than conceptual in connotation, but in denotation you may be correct.
Posted By: Jester Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 04:09 AM
Quote:

Quote:

A synonym is a word that has a similar meaning as another, Like mad, angry, irate, etc.




Can't fool me. Synonym is something you spread on toast with butter and sugar.

Like I was born yesterday ...




So I read this post and think, that 1JohnnyG seems pretty cool
Posted By: Jester Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 04:11 AM
Quote:

Quote:

Sorry, I was answering if there was another word for a simile. Not sure if my word was right or not anyway, so no big deal.




You're cool, dude. I shouldn't type after 500 ml of White Zinfandel.

But I like your reply: simile / similitude. Might be more visual than conceptual in connotation, but in denotation you may be correct.




Then I read this post and think, White zinfindel? What a P.A.G.A.N. (person against goodness and normalcy)
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 04:12 AM
Quote:

Quote:

But to extend the time sort of a punishment for "APPEALING" then come up with the same results just a sham in my opinion.




I don't see how it's a sham.

Let's just say for the sake of argument that everything that has been reported (i.e. the A/B levels in Gordon's samples)...the NFL has a pretty big decision on its hands.

If they suspend Gordon for a year, they're going to catch hell in the media, mainly due to the proximity to the Rice suspension and the rapidly changing opinions on marijuana use.

If they let him off, there's going to be a bit of a firestorm there, as well. Maybe even some lawsuits.

I would take my time on this one if I were them.

As far as the length of the process...if you want to blame someone, blame Gordon, not the NFL. He's the one that put him/us in this situation.

If I had to guess, I'd say 8 games. It's a pretty safe middle ground for them.



I think that is fairly accurate.

I'm not sure exactly when Gordon failed the drug test but I believe it was some time right around the end of the season.. the Ray Rice video came out in mid February so probably about the same time, maybe a month later. Ray Rice got his wrapped up a couple weeks ago and he didn't appeal. Gordon's should be wrapped up this week or next and he did appeal.. so I don't see how the NFL is really dragging this out.

The only caveat to that is Goodell's comment recently about Gordon's punishment being part of the CBA.. if it's a rule that he has to stick with, then this should have been over long ago. The fact that it is dragging on leads me to believe that Goodell is at least considering doing something different than what the CBA calls for.

I could see anywhere from 6 to 10 games...
Posted By: YTownBrownsFan Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 04:16 AM
Quote:

Quote:

A synonym is a word that has a similar meaning as another, Like mad, angry, irate, etc.




Can't fool me. Synonym is something you spread on toast with butter and sugar.

Like I was born yesterday ...






Well done sir. Well done.
Posted By: YTownBrownsFan Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 04:17 AM
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

A synonym is a word that has a similar meaning as another, Like mad, angry, irate, etc.




Can't fool me. Synonym is something you spread on toast with butter and sugar.

Like I was born yesterday ...




So I read this post and think, that 1JohnnyG seems pretty cool




So .... Johnny B Good .....?
Posted By: Clemdawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 04:18 AM
now THAT was worth a good chuckle....

Posted By: Razorthorns Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 06:05 AM
I think he will have a 2 game suspension, come back and destroy his knee of the first play of the game he comes back, then while doing rehab find out his career is over and he is addicted to pain killers.

Then Hoyer will also get injured. We will cut him and then he will go on to be a superbowl winning QB in Denver.


Isn't that how Browns luck translates it?
Posted By: Dawgs4Life Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 09:35 AM
Quote:

I think he will have a 2 game suspension, come back and destroy his knee of the first play of the game he comes back, then while doing rehab find out his career is over and he is addicted to pain killers.

Then Hoyer will also get injured. We will cut him and then he will go on to be a superbowl winning QB in Denver.


Isn't that how Browns luck translates it?




You forgot a subsequent staph infection
Posted By: jfanent Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 11:34 AM
Is there another word for Thesaurus?
Posted By: Bard Dawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 12:54 PM
There certainly is!

It rhymes with "orange."
Posted By: eotab Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 01:09 PM
Quote:

Is there another word for Thesaurus?




Why are we talking about Jurassic Park?
Posted By: PrplPplEater Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 02:50 PM
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Good to hear. But...

What is an OVI? I am not familiar with that abbreviation.
Are we sure that this is his 1st OVI?




OVI - operating a vehicle impaired. In many states, that's become the new "norm" for a charge, instead of DUI.....driving under the influence.




If he can weasel his way out of a drug test then a DUI/OVI is no problem. He'll pay some money, do some "community service" and get it down to reckless driving. That's what most people with his privilege do.




I could have sworn that it was already stated that the charges were going to be changed and that he wasn't charged with a DUI/DWI/OVI.



Checking now.... he has a court date set for August 26th.

Case #1
Offense Code - Description - Statute
5405 - Traffic DRIVING WHILE IMPAIRED - 20-138.1
9955 - Traffic CIVIL REVOCATION DR LIC (30) - 20-16.5


Case #2
Offense Code - Description - Statute
4450 - Infraction SPEEDING - 20-141(B)



I expect that the DWI will get plead down and he will pay fines on the others. This isn't a "famous athlete" thing, either... it's a common "I'm paying my lawyer a ton of money" thing. I know people that have gotten out of a half dozen DUI's that way... simply because their lawyer is buddies with the right judge(s). I would expect that his lawyer(s) will find a way to be friends with lots of the correct people down there.

It looks like his license is suspended now (automatic 30 day suspension), however, so hopefully he's being smarter about that. That said, a 30-day suspension in North Carolina holds no weight in Ohio if his license is an Ohio license. It just means he can't drive in North Carolina. At worst, he will lose his license for 6 months, but he'll have full driving privileges for work... the courts are easy that way.
Posted By: superbowldogg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 04:56 PM
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

A synonym is a word that has a similar meaning as another, Like mad, angry, irate, etc.




Can't fool me. Synonym is something you spread on toast with butter and sugar.

Like I was born yesterday ...




So I read this post and think, that 1JohnnyG seems pretty cool




I"m amused
Posted By: superbowldogg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 04:58 PM
Quote:

There certainly is!

It rhymes with "orange."




I'd like to thank Eminem for rhyming Orange...


https://www.youtube.com/v/_kQBVneC30o





Posted By: FreeAgent Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 05:11 PM
Oh look a new post in the Josh Gordon thread maybe there is news about his suspension appeal...



Posted By: YTownBrownsFan Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 05:26 PM
Wow ... I had no idea there was such a science to rhyming orange ......

Storange? Forange? Really? lol
Posted By: 1JohnnyG Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 08:59 PM
Quote:

Quote:

Good to hear. But...

What is an OVI? I am not familiar with that abbreviation.
Are we sure that this is his 1st OVI?




OVI - operating a vehicle impaired. In many states, that's become the new "norm" for a charge, instead of DUI.....driving under the influence.




The mystery is solve - ed. :-)

When I grew up it was "DWI," "Driving While Intoxicated."

That's before drug-impaired driving began replacing alcohol to kill people behind the wheel.
Posted By: 1JohnnyG Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 09:05 PM
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Sorry, I was answering if there was another word for a simile. Not sure if my word was right or not anyway, so no big deal.




You're cool, dude. I shouldn't type after 500 ml of White Zinfandel.

But I like your reply: simile / similitude. Might be more visual than conceptual in connotation, but in denotation you may be correct.




Then I read this post and think, White zinfindel? What a P.A.G.A.N. (person against goodness and normalcy)




Now, now, now. It's actually a fairly tasty choice with a nice local flavor.

Can't compete with the NE Ohio wineries out in Ashtabula & Lake Counties, of course, but you take what you get in exile in Illinois.

Anyway, I'm way too old for boilermakers. Beer still tastes good, though.
Posted By: 1JohnnyG Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/07/14 09:10 PM
So I read this post and think, that 1JohnnyG seems pretty cool




Eventually you'll read some of my posts to convince you otherwise.

I'm just a crabby old geezer who tries to have some fun and is glad to hang out online with a stalwart band of lads (& lasses?) who actually hope the Browns will win another NFL Championship in my lifetime.
Posted By: Halfback32 Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/13/14 05:17 PM
It has been 9 days now.. The longer this ruling drags out.. the more I think the ruling will be in Gordon's favor.

jmho
Posted By: FreeAgent Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/13/14 05:29 PM
There was a bunch of talk on Twitter because he wasn't practicing today and Haslem was talking to Gordon for a long time. Picture showed Haslem in stern face.

IDK, hope it gets sorted out soon.
Posted By: OrlandoDawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/13/14 05:37 PM
Quote:

There was a bunch of talk on Twitter because he wasn't practicing today and Haslem was talking to Gordon for a long time. Picture showed Haslem in stern face.

IDK, hope it gets sorted out soon.




Don't think I would put too much stock into what a still photo shows. A still photo can sometimes make a person laughing look like a raving loon.
Posted By: Dawgs4Life Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/13/14 05:40 PM
The only thing that's fishy is that Pettine also had a lengthy discussion during practice
Posted By: FreeAgent Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/13/14 05:45 PM
Quote:

Quote:

There was a bunch of talk on Twitter because he wasn't practicing today and Haslem was talking to Gordon for a long time. Picture showed Haslem in stern face.

IDK, hope it gets sorted out soon.




Don't think I would put too much stock into what a still photo shows. A still photo can sometimes make a person laughing look like a raving loon.




I don't put any stock into it. Just noting the only news about Josh of the day. Besides that it's been crickets thus far.
Posted By: eotab Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/13/14 06:15 PM
I don't know, why do I feel like Josh Gordon is being traded to the Texans for Andre Johnson???

Posted By: CHSDawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/13/14 06:29 PM
Quote:

I don't know, why do I feel like Josh Gordon is being traded to the Texans for Andre Johnson???






Dunno. Farmer isn't that dumb.
Posted By: Razorthorns Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/13/14 07:04 PM
I don't know you guys ever think they might just be trying to give josh some support or tough love/advice?
Posted By: Dawg_LB Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/13/14 10:05 PM
Quote:

It has been 9 days now.. The longer this ruling drags out.. the more I think the ruling will be in Gordon's favor.

jmho




Seriously, if he gets banned for a year now, that'll mean he'll miss the most of camp and etc going into 2015. That's not fair. They've had beyond, I mean literally BEYOND, ample time to get this figured out - yet it seems like their sitting with their thumb up their butts.

It's turned from frustrating to aggravating to now it's just pissing me off. Seriously what are they doing and why are they taking eternity to do it? So now if he gets banned for a year, he's basically punished for this season and the start of next which who knows, around here in Clv we may have a new coach and new coordinators in which he won't be able to practice and get familiar with the playbook. In any case, it really is pissing me off.
Posted By: Razorthorns Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/13/14 10:12 PM
If they try to excessively punish him then Josh will just take them to court and use Ohio law to make them revoke it. Josh didn't fail anything by state law.

I think Haslem was just being an owner and talking to his most important people.
Posted By: Punchsmack Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/13/14 10:40 PM
Quote:

If they try to excessively punish him then Josh will just take them to court and use Ohio law to make them revoke it. Josh didn't fail anything by state law.




Outside of one bloggers opinion and a few on this board, has anyone heard any confirmation that Josh's lawyers might actually do this? It seems like a logical next step to keep Josh on the field for the next year or so before a ruling in an Ohio court can be determined.

As for the length of time and how it might impact Josh's availability for next years training camp, I doubt he'd miss that in almost any situation. Meaning, even if he gets hit with the full year ban, I would expect he and the team start asking for a reinstatement meeting a day after the Super Bowl because of how long it took to decide on the suspension. And anyway, Josh will probably get a 4-8 game suspension anyway.

So I wouldn't worry about any offseason workout or training camp stuff.
Posted By: cfrs15 Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/13/14 11:13 PM
Quote:

If they try to excessively punish him then Josh will just take them to court and use Ohio law to make them revoke it. Josh didn't fail anything by state law.




In his contract it was stated that he couldn't do drugs and that he would be subject to drug tests. He did drugs and failed drug tests. It has nothing to do with state law. He works for a private entity that he signed a contract with.
Posted By: Ballpeen Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/13/14 11:28 PM
Exactly.
Posted By: pblack18707 Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/13/14 11:51 PM
Cleveland Browns helping Josh Gordon set up post-suspension support system and treatment if necessary

BEREA, Ohio --- Browns owner Jimmy Haslam spent the first 10 minutes or so of practice on Wednesday chatting with receiver Josh Gordon, who's awaiting word on his indefinite drug ban by the NFL.

It's been a weekly sight at camp, the two men conversing on the field for a few minutes, even sharing an embrace last week when they met at midfield.

But the support from the Browns' front office hasn't stopped there.

The club, which is bracing for at least eight games without its star wideout, has been actively involved in Gordon's plans after he's suspended, league sources have told cleveland.com. Arbitrator Harold Henderson can hand down his ruling any day now, with a decision expected within the next two weeks.

With Gordon facing possible banishment from the league for at least a year, the Browns have been pro-active in lining up a support system and possible treatment if necessary while he's away. During that time, he'd be prohibited from working out with the team or attending meetings.

If Henderson reduces the suspension, there's a chance Gordon can remain with the club during the ban. Henderson can impose any number of games off for Gordon, or overturn the ban altogether.

The Browns were also instrumental in Gordon checking himself into rehab for two weeks after his DWI in Raleigh, N.C. over July 4th weekend. Since then, they've reached out to several substance abuse professionals, including former Cavs coach John Lucas, about possible post-suspension care for Gordon in the event he needs it.

In order for him to return to the Browns, he'll have to remain clean while he's away, and the Browns are committed to helping him in any way they can. Those close to Gordon don't want him to falter while he's away like Jaguars receiver Justin Blackmon has, a source said.

The difference, one source said, is that Blackmon, who's currently out of the league, has had numerous positive tests while Gordon has tested negative 70 times since he joined the Browns in 2012.

At the start of camp, Haslam made it clear that the Browns will stick by Gordon -- to a point. The DWI, for which Gordon has a hearing Aug. 26, did not sit well with the team while they were standing by him on the suspension.

"First and foremost, we care about our players,'' he said last month. "We want our players to take care of themselves and make good decisions. We're going to do everything we can to support him. At the same time, the players have to understand they're accountable to themselves, to their teammates, to the front office and to our fans. People have to understand that, and I'll leave it at that."

Gordon, who's been sidelined with an abdominal issue this week, has also felt an overwhelming amount of support from his teammates.

"Man, Josh Gordon is an athletic freak, man,'' said second-year wideout Charles Johnson. "He's a one-of-a-kind. From when I first got here until now, you can just see how he's grown. He's a hard worker, you can see each day he comes out and keeps working harder and harder. And I think he's grown as a person. Man, we're a better team with Josh Gordon, I'll tell you that.

"He comes out here and shows all of us love and he supports us even when he's not practicing. We want to look up to him, we want to do right by him and we're going to hope for the best for him."

Receiver Travis Benjamin, one of Gordon's best friends on the team, is already looking forward to Gordon's return, whenever that may be.

"When we go on the field and everybody knows that number 12 is back, it's going to be a great season,'' he said.

Benjamin said Gordon has been an inspiration to the team with the way he's handled things.

"He's got great spirits,'' said Benjamin. "As a teammate, he was down in the huddle today telling people what they needed to do and making sure everybody is on the right path on offense. He's been positive about everything.''

Benjamin said fans probably have the wrong impression of Gordon from all of his transgressions.

"He's a very good guy,'' said Benjamin. "He's very intelligent. He laughs and jokes around. He was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.''

Benjamin has tried to serve the same role for Gordon that Barkevious Mingo has for Armonty Bryant -- a straight and narrow buddy to keep him out of trouble.

"We play video games all the time and I'll send him texts throughout the day just to see what he's up to,'' said Benjamin. "Sometimes we go hang out at Joe Haden's house or (Gordon's) house.''

Benjamin said that in the three seasons he's been around Gordon, he's never seen him use a banned substance.

"I've never seen him do anything,'' he said.

He said he hopes that fans will someday see the Gordon he knows.

"Hopefully when the decision is made and he comes back and plays, and stays on that straight and narrow, he can stay with the Browns until his career is over,'' said Benjamin. "Hopefully things will turn out well and people will understand him.''

In the meantime, Benjamin doesn't talk to Gordon much about his situation.

"I try to avoid those things because you never want to put that hassle on somebody like that,'' he said. "I just want him to be with the guys, hanging out.''

Hopefully for the Browns, he'll be able to do that again soon enough.

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ss..._medium=twitter
Posted By: YTownBrownsFan Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/13/14 11:56 PM
Quote:

Quote:

If they try to excessively punish him then Josh will just take them to court and use Ohio law to make them revoke it. Josh didn't fail anything by state law.




In his contract it was stated that he couldn't do drugs and that he would be subject to drug tests. He did drugs and failed drug tests. It has nothing to do with state law. He works for a private entity that he signed a contract with.




There is a state law (and state laws have been upheld over NFL contract terms in the past) that says that in the event of a failed drug test, where the secondary test is below the test limit, that the 2nd sample is the only sample to be used.

In other words, the NFL policy is in violation of ohio employment laws.

No matter whether someone agrees or disagree with any other aspect of this entire Gordon nightmare, the simple fact is that he has Ohio law on his side, and Ohio law, in a court of law, will trump NFL policy all day long and twice on Wednesday.

I don't think that the NFL wants to push this too far, because they could find a ruling against them that forces them into using every individual state law in conjunction with any punishment of their players, and the union coming back when there are uneven punishments applied. That would be a real nightmare for the NFL.

They need to handle this carefully. I think that we'll have a negotiated settlement, with a 4 game suspension. That's my guess as to what will happen. The NFL will sell it as "fair" because of the "unusual and extenuating circumstances of the case", and will avoid trying state law vs NFL policy in court.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 12:56 AM
You really had to revive this stupid ass thread? It's always refreshing reading all the posts how Gordon is the victim.

It's truly unbelievable.
Posted By: FreeAgent Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 02:07 AM
web page


Getty Images
In the NFL, there are few coincidences, big or otherwise.

And the cynical view in the wake of the leak from the league office to Mark Maske of the Washington Post that the NFL will be beefing up the penalties for future domestic violence cases is that the league hopes to take some of the sting out of the looming decision to suspend Browns receiver Josh Gordon for a full year.

Applied as written, Gordon’s suspension becomes a no-brainer. He tested positive while in Stage III of the program, which compels a full-year suspension, and nothing less.

Fully aware that the media and plenty of fans will point to the discrepancy between Gordon’s full-year ban and the two-game suspension imposed on Ray Rice for assaulting his then-fiancée, the only way to deflect attention regarding the comparison between the two cases would be to send the message that, in future cases like Rice’s, the punishment will be three times greater.

If Josh Gordon will indeed be suspended for a full year, the NFL owes it to the Browns and to Gordon to implement the decision now, so that Gordon can start the 365-day clock ticking on his return. Chances are the league plans to wait a couple more days, until roughly 4:59 p.m. ET.
Posted By: Clemdawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 02:10 AM
Quote:

You really had to revive this stupid ass thread?





Posted By: Dawgs4Life Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 02:15 AM
Quote:

Quote:

You really had to revive this stupid ass thread?











Good find Clem. This scene always reminds me of Mike and Mike when they play the clip after a team comes back in a long series.
Posted By: Clemdawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 02:22 AM
Posted By: archbolddawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 02:28 AM
Quote:

Oh look a new post in the Josh Gordon thread maybe there is news about his suspension appeal...








This meme - is that what it's called? Regardless, this is the best!
Posted By: TopDawg16 Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 02:38 AM
The little "videos" like that are called ".gifs"
Posted By: AkBrownsfan Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 02:44 AM
I kinda think it's a meme that is also a .gif

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_meme

http://www.techterms.com/definition/gif
Posted By: archbolddawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 02:44 AM
Quote:

The little "videos" like that are called ".gifs"





Thanks.

What the heck is a meme?
Posted By: CHSDawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 02:58 AM
Quote:

Quote:

The little "videos" like that are called ".gifs"





Thanks.

What the heck is a meme?




A mimicked technique. That post was also a meme. It was also a reaction image as well.
Posted By: archbolddawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 03:04 AM
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

The little "videos" like that are called ".gifs"





Thanks.

What the heck is a meme?




A mimicked technique. That post was also a meme. It was also a reaction image as well.




So, what I'm gathering is, there is no consensus on what it was. Other than funny.
Posted By: CHSDawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 03:12 AM
No, it was all of the above.

".gif" refers to the file the image was.

Meme is a mimicked technique that's copied from person to person across cultures. That image has been around for years, so that's a check.

A Reaction image is an image that depicts a reaction. Which it also does.

So, it's all 3. Internet culture, man.
Posted By: archbolddawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 03:25 AM
Quote:

No, it was all of the above.

".gif" refers to the file the image was.

Meme is a mimicked technique that's copied from person to person across cultures. That image has been around for years, so that's a check.

A Reaction image is an image that depicts a reaction. Which it also does.

So, it's all 3. Internet culture, man.




Thanks.

Simpler to say "that was funny" whatever the heck it's called, no?
Posted By: CHSDawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 03:27 AM
Simple, but it's a lot more enjoyable storing up useless information about internet culture.
Posted By: YTownBrownsFan Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 04:01 AM
Sorry to bring this thread back up, but i think this is pertinent.

Cleveland Browns helping Josh Gordon set up post-suspension support system and treatment if necessary | cleveland.com
http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2014/08/cleveland_browns_helping_josh.html#incart_m-rpt-1

BEREA, Ohio --- Browns owner Jimmy Haslam spent the first 10 minutes or so of practice Wednesday chatting with receiver Josh Gordon, who's awaiting word on his indefinite drug ban by the NFL.

It's been a weekly sight at camp, the two men conversing on the field for a few minutes, even sharing an embrace last week when they met at midfield.

But the support from the Browns' front office hasn't stopped there.

The club, which is bracing for at least eight games without its star wideout, has been actively involved in Gordon's plans after he's suspended, league sources have told the Northeast Ohio Media Group. Arbitrator Harold Henderson can hand down his ruling any day, with a decision expected within the next two weeks.

With Gordon facing possible banishment from the league for at least a year, the Browns have been proactive in lining up a support system and possible treatment if necessary while he's away. During that time, he'd be prohibited from working out with the team or attending meetings.

If Henderson reduces the suspension, there's a chance Gordon can remain with the club during the ban. Henderson can impose any number of games off for Gordon, or overturn the ban altogether.

The Browns were also instrumental in Gordon checking himself into rehab for two weeks after his DWI in Raleigh, N.C. over July 4th weekend. Since then, they've reached out to several substance abuse professionals, including former Cavs coach John Lucas, about possible post-suspension care for Gordon in the event he needs it.

In order for him to return to the Browns, he'll have to remain clean while he's away, and the Browns are committed to helping him any way they can. Those close to Gordon don't want him to falter while he's away like Jaguars receiver Justin Blackmon has, a source said.

The difference, one source said, is Blackmon, who's currently out of the league, has had numerous positive tests while Gordon has tested negative 70 times since he joined the Browns in 2012.

At the start of camp, Haslam made it clear the Browns will stick by Gordon -- to a point. The DWI, for which Gordon has a hearing Aug. 26, did not sit well with the team while it was standing by him on the suspension.

"First and foremost, we care about our players,'' he said last month. "We want our players to take care of themselves and make good decisions. We're going to do everything we can to support him. At the same time, the players have to understand they're accountable to themselves, to their teammates, to the front office and to our fans. People have to understand that, and I'll leave it at that."

Gordon, who's been sidelined with an abdominal issue this week, has also felt an overwhelming amount of support from his teammates.

"Man, Josh Gordon is an athletic freak, man,'' said second-year wideout Charles Johnson. "He's a one-of-a-kind. From when I first got here until now, you can just see how he's grown. He's a hard worker, you can see each day he comes out and keeps working harder and harder. And I think he's grown as a person. Man, we're a better team with Josh Gordon, I'll tell you that.

"He comes out here and shows all of us love and he supports us even when he's not practicing. We want to look up to him, we want to do right by him and we're going to hope for the best for him."

Receiver Travis Benjamin, one of Gordon's best friends on the team, is already looking forward to Gordon's return, whenever that may be.

"When we go on the field and everybody knows that number 12 is back, it's going to be a great season,'' he said.

Benjamin said Gordon has been an inspiration to the team with the way he's handled things.

"He's got great spirits,'' said Benjamin. "As a teammate, he was down in the huddle today telling people what they needed to do and making sure everybody is on the right path on offense. He's been positive about everything.''

Benjamin said fans probably have the wrong impression of Gordon from all of his transgressions.

"He's a very good guy,'' said Benjamin. "He's very intelligent. He laughs and jokes around. He was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.''

Benjamin has tried to serve the same role for Gordon that Barkevious Mingo has for Armonty Bryant -- a straight and narrow buddy to keep him out of trouble.

"We play video games all the time and I'll send him texts throughout the day just to see what he's up to,'' said Benjamin. "Sometimes we go hang out at Joe Haden's house or (Gordon's) house.''

Benjamin said that in the three seasons he's been around Gordon, he's never seen him use a banned substance.

"I've never seen him do anything,'' he said.

He said he hopes that fans will someday see the Gordon he knows.

"Hopefully when the decision is made and he comes back and plays, and stays on that straight and narrow, he can stay with the Browns until his career is over,'' said Benjamin. "Hopefully things will turn out well and people will understand him.''

In the meantime, Benjamin doesn't talk to Gordon much about his situation.

"I try to avoid those things because you never want to put that hassle on somebody like that,'' he said. "I just want him to be with the guys, hanging out.''

Hopefully for the Browns, he'll be able to do that again soon enough.
Posted By: DevilDawg2847 Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 04:46 AM
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Good to hear. But...

What is an OVI? I am not familiar with that abbreviation.
Are we sure that this is his 1st OVI?




OVI - operating a vehicle impaired. In many states, that's become the new "norm" for a charge, instead of DUI.....driving under the influence.




If he can weasel his way out of a drug test then a DUI/OVI is no problem. He'll pay some money, do some "community service" and get it down to reckless driving. That's what most people with his privilege do.




I could have sworn that it was already stated that the charges were going to be changed and that he wasn't charged with a DUI/DWI/OVI.



Checking now.... he has a court date set for August 26th.

Case #1
Offense Code - Description - Statute
5405 - Traffic DRIVING WHILE IMPAIRED - 20-138.1
9955 - Traffic CIVIL REVOCATION DR LIC (30) - 20-16.5


Case #2
Offense Code - Description - Statute
4450 - Infraction SPEEDING - 20-141(B)



I expect that the DWI will get plead down and he will pay fines on the others. This isn't a "famous athlete" thing, either... it's a common "I'm paying my lawyer a ton of money" thing. I know people that have gotten out of a half dozen DUI's that way... simply because their lawyer is buddies with the right judge(s). I would expect that his lawyer(s) will find a way to be friends with lots of the correct people down there.

It looks like his license is suspended now (automatic 30 day suspension), however, so hopefully he's being smarter about that. That said, a 30-day suspension in North Carolina holds no weight in Ohio if his license is an Ohio license. It just means he can't drive in North Carolina. At worst, he will lose his license for 6 months, but he'll have full driving privileges for work... the courts are easy that way.





You guys seem to think he's going to beat the DWI charge pretty easy, but having some experience with the issue in the county he got hooked up in, and knowledge about the PD that arrested him, it's not likely. There is no lesser charge to plead down to. He either pleads guilty, or takes it to court where he ends up with a "guilty" or "not guilty". The local PD is huge on DWI's.. they have a specific DWI enforcement unit. They just released the stats around July... last year there were over 900 DWI arrests by that time.. this year somewhere over 1600 I think. On top of that, there is an election coming up for a new D.A., so I really doubt that his lawyers will find anyone to get buddy buddy with.

Now the GOOD news for Gordon is that for as gung ho Wake County is on getting DWI arrests, they actually aren't that tough on sentencing. Even if he took it to trial and was found guilty, he's not looking at any jail time. There's nothing grossly aggravating (he didn't kill anyone, no wreck, didn't blow over .15 BAC.. and the only aggravating factor is 15 mph over (which is nothing).. he'll get a fine.. 24 hrs of community service and possibly unsupervised probation for 12 months.

In all likelihood either a) if he's looking at a reduces suspension, he pleads to this charge and gets rid of it, the punishment already rolled in to the suspension.. or b) his lawyers stretch it out (which isn't hard) and they take care of it quietly later in the season and it just becomes a 5 line article on ESPN.
Posted By: CHSDawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 04:52 AM
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Good to hear. But...

What is an OVI? I am not familiar with that abbreviation.
Are we sure that this is his 1st OVI?




OVI - operating a vehicle impaired. In many states, that's become the new "norm" for a charge, instead of DUI.....driving under the influence.




If he can weasel his way out of a drug test then a DUI/OVI is no problem. He'll pay some money, do some "community service" and get it down to reckless driving. That's what most people with his privilege do.




I could have sworn that it was already stated that the charges were going to be changed and that he wasn't charged with a DUI/DWI/OVI.



Checking now.... he has a court date set for August 26th.

Case #1
Offense Code - Description - Statute
5405 - Traffic DRIVING WHILE IMPAIRED - 20-138.1
9955 - Traffic CIVIL REVOCATION DR LIC (30) - 20-16.5


Case #2
Offense Code - Description - Statute
4450 - Infraction SPEEDING - 20-141(B)



I expect that the DWI will get plead down and he will pay fines on the others. This isn't a "famous athlete" thing, either... it's a common "I'm paying my lawyer a ton of money" thing. I know people that have gotten out of a half dozen DUI's that way... simply because their lawyer is buddies with the right judge(s). I would expect that his lawyer(s) will find a way to be friends with lots of the correct people down there.

It looks like his license is suspended now (automatic 30 day suspension), however, so hopefully he's being smarter about that. That said, a 30-day suspension in North Carolina holds no weight in Ohio if his license is an Ohio license. It just means he can't drive in North Carolina. At worst, he will lose his license for 6 months, but he'll have full driving privileges for work... the courts are easy that way.





On top of that, there is an election coming up for a new D.A., so I really doubt that his lawyers will find anyone to get buddy buddy with.




Elections are great times to find friends. Everyone needs some funds.
Posted By: Frenchy Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 05:27 AM
I'm so frickin tired of not knowing!!!
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 05:28 AM
Quote:

Quote:

If they try to excessively punish him then Josh will just take them to court and use Ohio law to make them revoke it. Josh didn't fail anything by state law.




Outside of one bloggers opinion and a few on this board, has anyone heard any confirmation that Josh's lawyers might actually do this? It seems like a logical next step to keep Josh on the field for the next year or so before a ruling in an Ohio court can be determined.



Josh's lawyers would be stupid to tip their hand on what they may or may not do next before Goodell makes his decision.
Posted By: YTownBrownsFan Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 06:05 AM
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

If they try to excessively punish him then Josh will just take them to court and use Ohio law to make them revoke it. Josh didn't fail anything by state law.




Outside of one bloggers opinion and a few on this board, has anyone heard any confirmation that Josh's lawyers might actually do this? It seems like a logical next step to keep Josh on the field for the next year or so before a ruling in an Ohio court can be determined.



Josh's lawyers would be stupid to tip their hand on what they may or may not do next before Goodell makes his decision.




I don't think it would hurt his case if they said that they intend to pursue the case in court, and would look for a restraining injunction against the NFL in the meantime. (if he is suspended)

I am sure that Ohio employment law was the bulk of their case, and how the 2 samples are considered under Ohio state employment law, as opposed to the opposite way NFL policy. I am sure that they made the point that they would go to court, even if they might not have specifically said it.
Posted By: CapCity Dawg Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 11:02 AM
Quote:

Quote:

If they try to excessively punish him then Josh will just take them to court and use Ohio law to make them revoke it. Josh didn't fail anything by state law.




In his contract it was stated that he couldn't do drugs and that he would be subject to drug tests. He did drugs and failed drug tests. It has nothing to do with state law. He works for a private entity that he signed a contract with.




Well, if you feel like facts and logic have a place in this thread ...

Posted By: PrplPplEater I - 08/14/14 12:01 PM
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Good to hear. But...

What is an OVI? I am not familiar with that abbreviation.
Are we sure that this is his 1st OVI?




OVI - operating a vehicle impaired. In many states, that's become the new "norm" for a charge, instead of DUI.....driving under the influence.




If he can weasel his way out of a drug test then a DUI/OVI is no problem. He'll pay some money, do some "community service" and get it down to reckless driving. That's what most people with his privilege do.




I could have sworn that it was already stated that the charges were going to be changed and that he wasn't charged with a DUI/DWI/OVI.



Checking now.... he has a court date set for August 26th.

Case #1
Offense Code - Description - Statute
5405 - Traffic DRIVING WHILE IMPAIRED - 20-138.1
9955 - Traffic CIVIL REVOCATION DR LIC (30) - 20-16.5


Case #2
Offense Code - Description - Statute
4450 - Infraction SPEEDING - 20-141(B)



I expect that the DWI will get plead down and he will pay fines on the others. This isn't a "famous athlete" thing, either... it's a common "I'm paying my lawyer a ton of money" thing. I know people that have gotten out of a half dozen DUI's that way... simply because their lawyer is buddies with the right judge(s). I would expect that his lawyer(s) will find a way to be friends with lots of the correct people down there.

It looks like his license is suspended now (automatic 30 day suspension), however, so hopefully he's being smarter about that. That said, a 30-day suspension in North Carolina holds no weight in Ohio if his license is an Ohio license. It just means he can't drive in North Carolina. At worst, he will lose his license for 6 months, but he'll have full driving privileges for work... the courts are easy that way.





On top of that, there is an election coming up for a new D.A., so I really doubt that his lawyers will find anyone to get buddy buddy with.




Elections are great times to find friends. Everyone needs some funds.




Amen. Especially when you have a friend who happens to be a billionaire, and you yourself are a multimillionaire.
Friends are easy to find.

And, I'm not familiar with Raleigh's laws, but it's fairly common up here to have a DWI/DUI/OVI plead down to Reckless Operation (Reckless Driving down there). It would not surprise me at all to see a deal cut where he pleads guilty to the lesser Class 2 Misdemeanor, and as was already suggested, it would not surprise me at all if this case gets a continuance until after the season (and the election), during which time I'm sure a campaign donation or two might be made.
Posted By: Damanshot Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 12:44 PM
Quote:

You really had to revive this stupid ass thread? It's always refreshing reading all the posts how Gordon is the victim.

It's truly unbelievable.




If it erks you that much, don't read them... you aren't the board police.
Posted By: Punchsmack Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 02:30 PM
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

If they try to excessively punish him then Josh will just take them to court and use Ohio law to make them revoke it. Josh didn't fail anything by state law.




Outside of one bloggers opinion and a few on this board, has anyone heard any confirmation that Josh's lawyers might actually do this? It seems like a logical next step to keep Josh on the field for the next year or so before a ruling in an Ohio court can be determined.



Josh's lawyers would be stupid to tip their hand on what they may or may not do next before Goodell makes his decision.




Good point. But they could also use that as a bargining chip too. Something like, "drop it to 0 or we'll tie you up in Ohio court for the next 18 months, while Josh continues to play, and we know this will all get thrown out by the courts anyway."

But yes, I agree they wouldn't want to call this out to the media. I was just wondering if it was leaked.
Posted By: mgh888 Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 02:56 PM
Again, stating the very obvious without any reference to details of the case/test etc and with no reference to OH Law or NFL regulations ....

The fact that Gordon was pronounced with a failed drug test at the time of the draft.... what nearly 3 months ago .... and no final decision has been announced, tells everyone that this is not a clear cut, open and shut case. Regardless of whether its a technicality, right/wrong, media driven or whatever .... I'd guess they are negotiating or the NFL is finding a suitable story-line for their decision.
Posted By: redddog Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 03:08 PM
Quote:

Again, stating the very obvious without any reference to details of the case/test etc and with no reference to OH Law or NFL regulations ....

The fact that Gordon was pronounced with a failed drug test at the time of the draft.... what nearly 3 months ago .... and no final decision has been announced, tells everyone that this is not a clear cut, open and shut case. Regardless of whether its a technicality, right/wrong, media driven or whatever .... I'd guess they are negotiating or the NFL is finding a suitable story-line for their decision.




Or...they just want to appear to be in thoughtful consideration of the case.

I just don't buy the whole "longer it takes, the better the chances" argument. It IS an open and shut case if you read the rules. The question is whether they want this to drag out in the courts (in which there seems to be a discrepancy under Ohio labor law). And I remember reading somewhere that they would pursue that.

The other side of this is that the NFL would be opening themselves up to a legal battle everytime there is a violation if they cave in to Gordon's legal team. And I'm pretty sure they don't want that.

Should be interesting.
Posted By: eotab Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 03:32 PM
I think the premise here from most is that if it is truly an open & shut case...black & white...no Gray. Then it should have been ruled on immediately after the appeal was heard. Or 24 hours, or 48 hours. Not this 2-4 week thing!

jmho
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 03:38 PM
Quote:

I think the premise here from most is that if it is truly an open & shut case...black & white...no Gray. Then it should have been ruled on immediately after the appeal was heard. Or 24 hours, or 48 hours. Not this 2-4 week thing!

jmho



That is exactly my line of thinking. The fact that this is dragging on seems to indicate that they are at least considering doing something other than following the black and white rule as it has been explained.
Posted By: PrplPplEater Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 03:50 PM
Well, it has dragged on partly because Gordon has the right, and exercised said right, to appeal. That is the primary thing that has made this take so long.

Since that appeal, it hasn't been that long, but I would assume that the arbitrator is taking his time - probably at the request of the team and the league who are likely trying to negotiate an amicable resolution. Eventually, though, the arbitrator won't wait any longer and we'll have our news.
Posted By: no_logo_required Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 03:52 PM
unless Josh (and the NFLPA) decide there is a reasonable justification to take the issue to court, then we could have it drag out for years (like StarCaps in Minnesota).
Posted By: pblack18707 Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 03:55 PM
Quote:

the team and the league who are likely trying to negotiate an amicable resolution.




or the league is waiting until the browns have everything set to help josh while he cannot have contact with the team.
Posted By: PrplPplEater Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 04:01 PM
Very possible.
The league could also be waiting until after this week's MNF to see how JFF & Gordon look together on the field.... more importantly, they could be waiting to see how the ratings are. There's potentially a lot more than just some missed games by Gordon at stake here.
Posted By: bbrowns32 Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 04:07 PM
Quote:

There's potentially a lot more than just some missed games by Gordon at stake here.




Oh indeed! A JFF vs RGIII matchup, even in pre-season, could be a windfall for the NFL. Could Goodell phone Haslem and trade off no suspension for Gordon IF the Browns start JFF??? Will the NFL announce Gordon's "penalty" the day after the game? Nah, too obvious...
Posted By: Mr.BrownsFan Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 04:13 PM
RATINGS FOR THIS GAME ON MONDAY WILL BE OFF THE CHARTS FOR SURE!
Call me selfish, but I hope Josh is cleared on all charges and allowed to play day 1. Everyone would profit from it.
Posted By: pblack18707 Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 04:16 PM
j/c

why does anyone think josh will play? wasn't he hurt all week at practice?
Posted By: MemphisBrownie Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 04:18 PM
Quote:

I think the premise here from most is that if it is truly an open & shut case...black & white...no Gray. Then it should have been ruled on immediately after the appeal was heard. Or 24 hours, or 48 hours. Not this 2-4 week thing!

jmho




2-4 Weeks? Try 2-4 months!!
Posted By: eotab Re: More Josh Gordon, I guess - 08/14/14 04:21 PM
The months was because of Gordon's appeal process.

The 2-4 weeks I was referring to was the Arbitrators ruling after healing that appeal.

Again if cut n dry by the rules...then what's the hold up. If not for some reduced sentence? But if not and still cut n dry...then why so long. Its to screw the Brown's?
Cause I do not have a clue why they would want to do that. Accept for all the bad letters we send to the commish...lol