What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Josh Gordon - August 1, 2016 (3 Viewers)

the length of time it's taking doesn't bother me in the least.

the man with control is the only thing that bothers... anyone.

 
Soulfly3 said:
the length of time it's taking doesn't bother me in the least.

the man with control is the only thing that bothers... anyone.
Click to expand...
Ask yourself. What is in it for the NFL to reinstate Josh Gordon?

The NFL doesn't care about its players. The NFL cares about making money and its image. 

 
Chaka said:
I completely understand that narrative and agree with it on many levels.  But I think we are too quick to put a negative connotation on the whole situation when it is possible, just possible, that maybe Gordon is trying to help Manziel.  Everything that we know suggests that Gordon has been making every effort to stay sober and has committed to being in the best physical condition (presumably because he has committed to a football career).  I get that Manziel can be used as an argument to suggest that Gordon still isn't making good decisions but it also can be used as an argument to suggest that Gordon is trying to help someone in need realize that he, Manziel, is on the edge of throwing away something great and trying to help him get better.

I get the negativity, I really do (I would even admit that it is more likely based on the past) but I find it disappointing that I am the only one to suggest that maybe there is a more altruistic reason that explains Gordon choosing to hang out with Manziel.  Hell, I don't think even Soulfly suggested anything like that (I should probably be worried about that last part).
Click to expand...
i'm fine with that narrative, and it's possible that's the case, although i doubt it...but it shows a complete lack of self awareness.  

Gordon is trying to get re-instated into the NFL and save his career, there is zero upside to hanging out in clubs with the poster child for dysfunctional NFL players.  It's just not worth the risk, it makes no sense to anyone with half a brain.

Like i said if he's tested clean he should be re-instated, but he's not doing himself any favors.

 
fridayfrenzy said:
Ask yourself. What is in it for the NFL to reinstate Josh Gordon?

The NFL doesn't care about its players. The NFL cares about making money and its image. 
Click to expand...
Then why do they reinstate ANY player? I dont get your narrative, whatsoever. Literally, at all. 

 
At the height of domestic abuse in the public spotlight, the NFL had no issues reinstating guys like Rice and Hardy 

But you're trying to convince me the league is stressing about its image over a guy like Gordon? 

Truly laughable 

 
Soulfly3 said:
At the height of domestic abuse in the public spotlight, the NFL had no issues reinstating guys like Rice and Hardy 

But you're trying to convince me the league is stressing about its image over a guy like Gordon? 

Truly laughable 
Click to expand...
You do realize a judge forced the NFL to reinstate Ray Rice, right? 

Laughable it is. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wowwwwww, Gordon's latest Insta post REEKS of someone preparing for their NFL return. 

...  And of OG Kush

 
I like his talent as much as anyone. I'm so glad I wasn't tempted to grab him as early as his ADP is in any of my recent start ups. I feel bad for those guys sweating  that took him in the 20-40 range. 

I think he'll be reinstated but am still super worried about him going fwd. I'll definitely be selling to those that want to pay his ADP price or close to it once he's hopefully penciled in to come back. 

 
Chaka said:
I completely understand that narrative and agree with it on many levels.  But I think we are too quick to put a negative connotation on the whole situation when it is possible, just possible, that maybe Gordon is trying to help Manziel.  Everything that we know suggests that Gordon has been making every effort to stay sober and has committed to being in the best physical condition (presumably because he has committed to a football career).  I get that Manziel can be used as an argument to suggest that Gordon still isn't making good decisions but it also can be used as an argument to suggest that Gordon is trying to help someone in need realize that he, Manziel, is on the edge of throwing away something great and trying to help him get better.

I get the negativity, I really do (I would even admit that it is more likely based on the past) but I find it disappointing that I am the only one to suggest that maybe there is a more altruistic reason that explains Gordon choosing to hang out with Manziel.  Hell, I don't think even Soulfly suggested anything like that (I should probably be worried about that last part).
Click to expand...
Its ceratinly possible, but if Gordon was trying to help Manziel, he should get him to stop hanging out in clubs late at night. If Manziel truly was at the point where he needed help for addiction, thats not the right atmosphere to be getting it.

I know, I know - they are grown men and have a right to go wherever they want, but based on what I know about addiction, Johnny is far from the point where he'd be strong enough to surround himself with temptation.

 
fridayfrenzy said:
Ask yourself. What is in it for the NFL to reinstate Josh Gordon?

The NFL doesn't care about its players. The NFL cares about making money and its image. 
Click to expand...
Exactly. The last thing Goodell and the league want to do is to make a rash decision on reinstating Gordon just to see Instagram and Twitter flooded with pictures of him hanging out with guys like Manziel in nightclubs. Really not the image the league is looking for. And I know Gordon isn't a bright guy, but you would think there would be one person close to him who would tap you on the shoulder and tell him to wise up.

 
God the league is stupid. 

"Josh, the only way you are getting reinstated is if you act like a church mouse for a 18 months, and then maybe we will think about considering reinstating you". 

 
Not a Gordon owner or a Browns fan, but I think the league owes it to the Browns to make a decision before the draft. They need to know if they either need another WR or not. If Gordon remains suspended after the draft I think it will be very telling. We should know something in about 3 weeks.

 
KingPrawn said:
Not a Gordon owner or a Browns fan, but I think the league owes it to the Browns to make a decision before the draft. They need to know if they either need another WR or not. If Gordon remains suspended after the draft I think it will be very telling. We should know something in about 3 weeks.
Click to expand...
Browns owe it to themselves to not count on Gordon.  Plan as if they don't have him. 

What if he gets reinstated? That mean the Browns are in the clear,  and they can count on Gordon?  Of course not.   I think Gordon has proven over the years that counting on him isn't a good idea. 

He has not done anything wrong for a year.  Big deal.  He didn't do anything wrong for a year before he was drafted. 

 
If you are a Gordon owner you have to be concerned at this point

I would set his odds of playing this year at 60/40 and if he doesn't play this year, I would put his odds at ever playing again at 10-20%

 
Last edited by a moderator:
fridayfrenzy said:
Ask yourself. What is in it for the NFL to reinstate Josh Gordon?

The NFL doesn't care about its players. The NFL cares about making money and its image. 
Click to expand...
Ok. I'll bite. What is in it for the NFL to reinstate Josh Gordon? How about money. The NFL loves offense. It also loves it when a team sells out all it's home games and rating are up DO you know what feels tickets and drives ratings? Offense. That's why the NFL loves offense. Josh Gordon is instant offense. He's a record setting WR that can turn a game on its head. He is a player that gets home stadiums excited. Keeps them electric. He has the ability to make the Browns relevant again. Teams that aren't relevant don't make the NFL as much money as teams that are. Josh Gordon = Money. The NFL would be wise to reinstate him and start cashing checks.

:micdrop:

 
Sebowski said:
Ok. I'll bite. What is in it for the NFL to reinstate Josh Gordon? How about money. The NFL loves offense. It also loves it when a team sells out all it's home games and rating are up DO you know what feels tickets and drives ratings? Offense. That's why the NFL loves offense. Josh Gordon is instant offense. He's a record setting WR that can turn a game on its head. He is a player that gets home stadiums excited. Keeps them electric. He has the ability to make the Browns relevant again. Teams that aren't relevant don't make the NFL as much money as teams that are. Josh Gordon = Money. The NFL would be wise to reinstate him and start cashing checks.

:micdrop:
Click to expand...
:picksupmic:

The NFL increased revenue 16% in the 2014 season (when Gordon played just 5 games), compared to the 2013 season when he had his monster year.  Although revenue figures aren't available yet, revenue in 2015 (when Gordon didn't play, AT ALL) are expected to increase again.  The NFL doesn't need Gordon (or any 1 player) to keep raking in the money.

:micdrop:

 
Bayhawks said:
:picksupmic:

The NFL increased revenue 16% in the 2014 season (when Gordon played just 5 games), compared to the 2013 season when he had his monster year.  Although revenue figures aren't available yet, revenue in 2015 (when Gordon didn't play, AT ALL) are expected to increase again.  The NFL doesn't need Gordon (or any 1 player) to keep raking in the money.

:micdrop:
Click to expand...
Meh.  Sebowski won that round going away.

 
KingPrawn said:
Not a Gordon owner or a Browns fan, but I think the league owes it to the Browns to make a decision before the draft. They need to know if they either need another WR or not. If Gordon remains suspended after the draft I think it will be very telling. We should know something in about 3 weeks.
Click to expand...
They knew before the draft a few years back that Gordon was getting suspended and they STILL refused to draft any WRs

 
Chaka said:
Meh.  Sebowski won that round going away.
Click to expand...
Yeah, you're probably right.

I'm sure most businesses would be desperate to hire back an ex-employee who has, & could again, cause problems after they made substantially more money without him. :unsure: :unsure: :unsure: :unsure: :unsure:

 
Bayhawks said:
Yeah, you're probably right.

I'm sure most businesses would be desperate to hire back an ex-employee who has, & could again, cause problems after they made substantially more money without him. :unsure: :unsure: :unsure: :unsure: :unsure:
Click to expand...
Again...  Then why reinstate ANY player, ever? 

 
tangfoot said:
Reported: Personal attacks against other forum members. 
Click to expand...
I hope that is sarcasm or an attempt at humor.  Or maybe just too young to have enjoyed that luxurious beverage.

This thread has entered the realm of a Christine Michael conversation.

 
Soulfly3 said:
Again...  Then why reinstate ANY player, ever? 
Click to expand...
The recent treatment of indefinite suspensions show they don't want to reinstate them. 

Justin Blackmon, Daryl Washington, Tanard Jackson, Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson.  You have players still suspended, was suspended for two years or instances where NFLPA and a judge forced the NFL to reinstatement them. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The league is probably not happy with anything the Browns have done and the feet dragging has nothing to do with Gordon.

 
Soulfly3 said:
Again...  Then why reinstate ANY player, ever? 
Click to expand...
Perhaps because some players doesn't give the NFL reason to think they'll screw up again?  The NFL needs players, but there isn't any 1 player they need.  

If a guy seems like he has his stuff together & will not cause the NFL to have them to discipline him again, there is no reason NOT to reinstate him.  If, however, a player gives the impression that he might cause more trouble, the NFL doesn't need him; they'll keep making money.

Gordon posting pics of himself in Vegas, in tattoo parlors, & hanging with Manziel may give Goodell the idea that he's liable to drink/smoke again, so why bother w/reinstating him?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
These are the domestic violence suspensions since Goodell took over:

Ricky Manning (1 game), Chris Cook (2011 season), Ray Rice (Indefinite), Greg Hardy (10 games), Jonathan Dwyer (3 games), Rodney Austin (6 games).

All were reinstated/eligible to play.

 
Chaka said:
These are the domestic violence suspensions since Goodell took over:

Ricky Manning (1 game), Chris Cook (2011 season), Ray Rice (Indefinite), Greg Hardy (10 games), Jonathan Dwyer (3 games), Rodney Austin (6 games).

All were reinstated/eligible to play.
Click to expand...
ya, but no player has EVER been reinstated for things like drugs, PEDs etc. 

That's why we're all so stressed in here

 
Here is a question.  So what if they keep repeating?? 

Isn't there some sort of guideline where players are suspended X amount of time based on which occurrence it is??  So um, ya know, just stick to that.  If people repeat and get suspended more, so be it. 

This willy nilly suspension time frame and decision time frame looks much worse for the league.  Why make yourself look stupid when the players themselves are the ones who would look stupid if you just follow your own rules.

If you reinstate Gordon right now and he gets popped again and suspended for another year or two years, so what?  Does the league actually think that makes THEM look bad?  No, it makes Gordon look like an idiot.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123 said:
Here is a question.  So what if they keep repeating?? 

Isn't there some sort of guideline where players are suspended X amount of time based on which occurrence it is??  So um, ya know, just stick to that.  If people repeat and get suspended more, so be it. 

This willy nilly suspension time frame and decision time frame looks much worse for the league.  Why make yourself look stupid when the players themselves are the ones who would look stupid if you just follow your own rules.

If you reinstate Gordon right now and he gets popped again and suspended for another year or two years, so what?  Does the league actually think that makes THEM look bad?  No, it makes Gordon look like an idiot.
Click to expand...
It does make the league look bad; like they don't have a successful policy.  The purpose of a drug policy is to get drugs out of the workplace; either by removing a drug user from the environment, or by getting him to stop using.  If the player continues to get busted, the policy isn't working.

The reason there are stages & ways a player can apply for reinstatement is because its a bargained agreement.  If the NFL could have instituted any policy they wanted, they very well might have said "1 strike=permanent ban." But they had to come to an agreement with the NFLPA.  

Gordon is on the last stage & he has run out of automatic reinstatements; he has to PROVE he's not going to continue to violate the policy.  Each time he's been suspended, he's been reinstated, then violated the policy again.  Maybe the NFL doesn't want to deal with that any more.  Maybe the poor judgement he is showing by putting himself in questionable situations, with questionable people, AND POSTING PROOF OF THAT QUESTIONABLE JUDGEMENT ON SOCIAL MEDIA makes the NFL less likely to reinstate him.

 
So why does that make the NFL look bad again?  To whom does this look bad to?

So a player gets busted and suspended for a year, the LEAGUE looks bad??  Why???  To who??

Thanks, let me know

 
ghostguy123 said:
So why does that make the NFL look bad again?  To whom does this look bad to?

So a player gets busted and suspended for a year, the LEAGUE looks bad??  Why???  To who??

Thanks, let me know
Click to expand...
For the player to get to a year (indefinite suspension), he has to have been suspended multiple times, which means the NFL has failed to keep drugs out of their workplace, failed to help that person beat drugs, or both.  If the purpose of the policy is to do one of those two things (or both), which is the common view of a workplace drug policy, then the NFL policy has failed.  This looks bad to those who are willing/able to "throw stones" at the NFL.

If a player gets the indefinite suspension, he has made the NFL policy look ineffective.  The NFL could reinstate him, and take the chance that he might, AGAIN, cause the NFL's policy to look ineffective, or they could deny reinstatement, which would make it a successful (although drawn out) policy.  If he is not allowed back in the NFL, that particular case of a person on drugs in the workplace no longer exists.

Gordon's inability to give the impression that he is distancing himself from places and people associated with the causes for his previous suspensions might make Goodell/the NFL less likely to reinstate him, in order to make the policy appear more effective.

 
Bayhawks said:
Gordon's inability to give the impression that he is distancing himself from places and people associated with the causes for his previous suspensions might make Goodell/the NFL less likely to reinstate him, in order to make the policy appear more effective.
Click to expand...
If the NFL cared about making their policy APPEAR to be effective, they'd have a drug recovery program for their players. 

But hey, what do I know? 

 
So, again, WHO does this look bad to?  Fans??? 

The fans think the NFL looks stupid for not adhering to their own policies. 

Getting an indefinite suspension looks bad for the league because that is a stupid suspension to give. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123 said:
So, again, WHO does this look bad to?  Fans??? 

The fans think the NFL looks stupid for not adhering to their own policies. 

Getting an indefinite suspension looks bad for the league because that is a stupid suspension to give. 
Click to expand...
How has the NFL not adhered to its own policies?

Thanks, let me know.

 
Soulfly3 said:
If the NFL cared about making their policy APPEAR to be effective, they'd have a drug recovery program for their players. 

But hey, what do I know? 
Click to expand...
Agree 100%, but since they don't have that program, preventing those players from playing also makes the policy APPEAR to be effective.

 
Bayhawks said:
Agree 100%, but since they don't have that program, preventing those players from playing also makes the policy APPEAR to be effective.
Click to expand...
No, it makes it appear that the NFL has no control over their players and has to exclude them completely to make up for their lack of support. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Travdogg's positional rankings from week 4 onward
2
Replies
73
Views
4K
stillfeelme
S
T
Travdogg's positional rankings from week 8 onward
Replies
25
Views
2K
travdogg
T
T
Travdogg's positional rankings from week 5 onward
Replies
37
Views
3K
travdogg
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top