Your Guess - How Long Will CLE WR Josh Gordon Be Suspended For? (1 Viewer)

[False Start]

That is the only thing that worries anyone. But we cant consider what we dont know. The question is how long will he be suspended? If people are taking things they dont know into account over what has been made public so be it, but that doesnt seem like a smart play when making a guess to consider things you dont know.

As we know, there are known knowns; there are things that we know that we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don't know we don't know.

Am I as high as Josh Gordon or was that just really deep?

 

[opensourcebeer]

That is the only thing that worries anyone. But we cant consider what we dont know. The question is how long will he be suspended? If people are taking things they dont know into account over what has been made public so be it, but that doesnt seem like a smart play when making a guess to consider things you dont know.

As we know, there are known knowns; there are things that we know that we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don't know we don't know.

Am I as high as Josh Gordon or was that just really deep?

Probably a little of both.

 

[False Start]

http://espncleveland.com/common/more.php?m=49&post_id=33591

Gordon update: It wasn’t a great day for Browns receivers, who mostly struggled with being on the same page with the quarterbacks. Except for Josh Gordon, of course, who stands out in any group, much less this one, plucking balls out of the air no matter which quarterback is throwing them.

As the imaginary clock keeps ticking on a possible league suspension, Gordon had a traffic violation on Memorial Weekend that resulted in a passenger admitting to possession of marijuana. Yet on the field, you’d never know how Gordon’s eventual fate may be weighing on him.

“I can’t imagine that it wouldn’t. It would be human nature,” said Mike Pettine.

The Browns coach said he had no complaints about Gordon’s work ethic.

“He comes out and works hard, puts in a day’s work, (is) solid in the classroom. When he’s in the building, he’s been solid,” he said.

“It’s not the first guy in the league to be like that where when he’s in the building he’s great and has some issues, for whatever reason due to circumstances, when he’s out of the building. I’m not a stranger to situations like that and I don’t think the rest of the staff is either.”

In the context of a question about whether the NFL does enough to help players with drug problems, Pettine said, “I think there’s a lot of help available. I think the mandated programs for rookies are very important. I’ve sat in some of those meetings. It’s very impressive. But there has to be a willingness on the other side. Sometimes (they) get the message and it’s too late. In all my time in the league, there’s always going to be a handful of guys that just don’t get it.”

Pettine admitted there is frustration about not knowing Gordon’s status.

“At this point there is nothing to act on. It’s a difficult thing. But until anything happens, we have a plan in place for all eventualities. But like everybody else, we’re still in a holding pattern,” Pettine said.

 

[cdubz]

That is the only thing that worries anyone. But we cant consider what we dont know. The question is how long will he be suspended? If people are taking things they dont know into account over what has been made public so be it, but that doesnt seem like a smart play when making a guess to consider things you dont know.

As we know, there are known knowns; there are things that we know that we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don't know we don't know.

Am I as high as Josh Gordon or was that just really deep?

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

 

[cdubz]

I voted for 1-year as I think that is the most likely outcome. But I could see the median outcome being significantly south of that.

For example, something similar to:

40% chance of 1-year suspension

20% chance of 8 games

15% chance of 6 games

15% chance of 4 games

10% chance he gets off on a technicality

In actuality, the # of outcomes is probably only 2 or 3 of these. But our lack of knowledge of what is going on increases the uncertainty.

I think the chance he gets the full year is probably higher than the 40%, but don't think it is a lock by any means.

 

[Soulfly3]

If you read between the lines of Pettine's interview, you can see clear as day he's getting 6 games.

 

[nirad3]

I was referring to the above article or post or whatever it was speculating the league changing its policy just because an overwhelming amount of its players might get suspended due to it being embedded in the culture.

...clipped...

Probably one of the better posts I've read on any football message board in 15ish years.

 

[MAC_32]

Eleventy billion games.

 

[Bronco Billy]

That is the only thing that worries anyone. But we cant consider what we dont know. The question is how long will he be suspended? If people are taking things they dont know into account over what has been made public so be it, but that doesnt seem like a smart play when making a guess to consider things you dont know.

As we know, there are known knowns; there are things that we know that we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don't know we don't know.

I know. Right?

 

[stbugs]

I see recent signings of Austin, Bennett, and Armstrong as signs of concern. Not sure why others don't.

The most recent news also has Gordon in Stage 3 prior to his latest positive test. That would mean a mandatory one year minimum suspension.

a) they're vets and "scrubs" signed on minimal contracts - only austin given an "ok deal"

b) the most recent news you're referring to is from a 1yr old report from Mary Kay Cabot, that's being recirculated

Look at who Carolina got and their WR situation was worse than Cleveland's after cutting Smith. We picked up Avant and Cotchery and drafted Benjamin. Carolina was the #2 seed in the NFC last year, so a heck of a lot more of a contender than the Browns. I don't have a dog in this fight, but I wouldn't look at Cleveland's moves and see that as an indication on Gordon's suspension length. Plenty of OTs on the draft board and Carolina virtually ignored them. Does that mean they weren't concerned about losing both of the OTs this offseason or that they had a different plan than the draft?

But that's exactly what I'm saying. Carolina felt like they had a huge need at WR. Short of trading up higher into the first round, I'm not sure how they could have highlighted their need for WR any more than spending their first pick on Benjamin.

And for sure, none of how Carolina or Cleveland drafted may mean anything. But when we're blindly guessing, it's fun to play detective and talk about...

J

Cleveland didn't have the same benefit Carolina did at WR. Carolina was most likely already scouting WRs during the college season and as shown in the playoffs, they lacked a scoring threat in the red zone. I would bet they had Benjamin in their sites long before Cleveland had any idea that Gordon going to be suspended. I am pretty sure that Carolina knew as soon as the off-season started that Smith was likely cut and Ginn and LaFell would not be resigned.

While I used it as an example, it is a slightly different situation in that Cleveland didn't have as advanced knowledge. Still, Carolina passed on a lot of WRs and OTs and only drafted 1 WR and didn't go after any OTs/WRs in FA aside from folks that most would consider to be roster fillers not future cogs. If you asked all the pundits what Carolina needed most during FA after all the losses/retirements and before the draft, it was universally WR/OT and then DBs.

The other thing is that I liked all 3 of Cleveland's early picks and don't see any that I would change much. It is funny how people say that it is a sign that Gordon won't be out long, but I just see it as a strong draft where they got who they wanted. Reaching for a WR is not what they wanted to do and that was probably wise based on who they got and what they prepared for before the potential suspension.

 

[False Start]

Does anyone have the cliffsnotes version to what Gordon was saying?

Gordon, I mean this with no disrespect, I always want to read what you have to say but I just cant because I have no time to read the 12 paragraphs you always write.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I see recent signings of Austin, Bennett, and Armstrong as signs of concern. Not sure why others don't.

The most recent news also has Gordon in Stage 3 prior to his latest positive test. That would mean a mandatory one year minimum suspension.

a) they're vets and "scrubs" signed on minimal contracts - only austin given an "ok deal"

b) the most recent news you're referring to is from a 1yr old report from Mary Kay Cabot, that's being recirculated

Look at who Carolina got and their WR situation was worse than Cleveland's after cutting Smith. We picked up Avant and Cotchery and drafted Benjamin. Carolina was the #2 seed in the NFC last year, so a heck of a lot more of a contender than the Browns. I don't have a dog in this fight, but I wouldn't look at Cleveland's moves and see that as an indication on Gordon's suspension length. Plenty of OTs on the draft board and Carolina virtually ignored them. Does that mean they weren't concerned about losing both of the OTs this offseason or that they had a different plan than the draft?

But that's exactly what I'm saying. Carolina felt like they had a huge need at WR. Short of trading up higher into the first round, I'm not sure how they could have highlighted their need for WR any more than spending their first pick on Benjamin.

And for sure, none of how Carolina or Cleveland drafted may mean anything. But when we're blindly guessing, it's fun to play detective and talk about...

J

Cleveland didn't have the same benefit Carolina did at WR. Carolina was most likely already scouting WRs during the college season and as shown in the playoffs, they lacked a scoring threat in the red zone. I would bet they had Benjamin in their sites long before Cleveland had any idea that Gordon going to be suspended. I am pretty sure that Carolina knew as soon as the off-season started that Smith was likely cut and Ginn and LaFell would not be resigned.

While I used it as an example, it is a slightly different situation in that Cleveland didn't have as advanced knowledge. Still, Carolina passed on a lot of WRs and OTs and only drafted 1 WR and didn't go after any OTs/WRs in FA aside from folks that most would consider to be roster fillers not future cogs. If you asked all the pundits what Carolina needed most during FA after all the losses/retirements and before the draft, it was universally WR/OT and then DBs.

The other thing is that I liked all 3 of Cleveland's early picks and don't see any that I would change much. It is funny how people say that it is a sign that Gordon won't be out long, but I just see it as a strong draft where they got who they wanted. Reaching for a WR is not what they wanted to do and that was probably wise based on who they got and what they prepared for before the potential suspension.

Sure. Again, I think people are putting too much work in trying to build a position. The Browns certainly didn't "act" like they needed a WR in the draft. Carolina did. Does that really mean anything? We'll see.

J

 

[stbugs]

I see recent signings of Austin, Bennett, and Armstrong as signs of concern. Not sure why others don't.

The most recent news also has Gordon in Stage 3 prior to his latest positive test. That would mean a mandatory one year minimum suspension.

a) they're vets and "scrubs" signed on minimal contracts - only austin given an "ok deal"

b) the most recent news you're referring to is from a 1yr old report from Mary Kay Cabot, that's being recirculated

Look at who Carolina got and their WR situation was worse than Cleveland's after cutting Smith. We picked up Avant and Cotchery and drafted Benjamin. Carolina was the #2 seed in the NFC last year, so a heck of a lot more of a contender than the Browns. I don't have a dog in this fight, but I wouldn't look at Cleveland's moves and see that as an indication on Gordon's suspension length. Plenty of OTs on the draft board and Carolina virtually ignored them. Does that mean they weren't concerned about losing both of the OTs this offseason or that they had a different plan than the draft?

But that's exactly what I'm saying. Carolina felt like they had a huge need at WR. Short of trading up higher into the first round, I'm not sure how they could have highlighted their need for WR any more than spending their first pick on Benjamin.

And for sure, none of how Carolina or Cleveland drafted may mean anything. But when we're blindly guessing, it's fun to play detective and talk about...

J

Cleveland didn't have the same benefit Carolina did at WR. Carolina was most likely already scouting WRs during the college season and as shown in the playoffs, they lacked a scoring threat in the red zone. I would bet they had Benjamin in their sites long before Cleveland had any idea that Gordon going to be suspended. I am pretty sure that Carolina knew as soon as the off-season started that Smith was likely cut and Ginn and LaFell would not be resigned.

While I used it as an example, it is a slightly different situation in that Cleveland didn't have as advanced knowledge. Still, Carolina passed on a lot of WRs and OTs and only drafted 1 WR and didn't go after any OTs/WRs in FA aside from folks that most would consider to be roster fillers not future cogs. If you asked all the pundits what Carolina needed most during FA after all the losses/retirements and before the draft, it was universally WR/OT and then DBs.

The other thing is that I liked all 3 of Cleveland's early picks and don't see any that I would change much. It is funny how people say that it is a sign that Gordon won't be out long, but I just see it as a strong draft where they got who they wanted. Reaching for a WR is not what they wanted to do and that was probably wise based on who they got and what they prepared for before the potential suspension.

Sure. Again, I think people are putting too much work in trying to build a position. The Browns certainly didn't "act" like they needed a WR in the draft. Carolina did. Does that really mean anything? We'll see.

J

When will we know?

I don't blame the Browns for acting like that. I think it is smarter to not have a knee jerk reaction and stick to your plan. Carolina's plan already included Benjamin when Carolina knew they weren't going to re-sign LaFell, Ginn and Smith and they couldn't score TDs against SF in the playoffs. Carolina's plan was happening at the same time Gordon was leading the NFL in receiving for the Browns. That is the reason I put even less stock in the Browns not drafting a WR.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I see recent signings of Austin, Bennett, and Armstrong as signs of concern. Not sure why others don't.

The most recent news also has Gordon in Stage 3 prior to his latest positive test. That would mean a mandatory one year minimum suspension.

a) they're vets and "scrubs" signed on minimal contracts - only austin given an "ok deal"

b) the most recent news you're referring to is from a 1yr old report from Mary Kay Cabot, that's being recirculated

Look at who Carolina got and their WR situation was worse than Cleveland's after cutting Smith. We picked up Avant and Cotchery and drafted Benjamin. Carolina was the #2 seed in the NFC last year, so a heck of a lot more of a contender than the Browns. I don't have a dog in this fight, but I wouldn't look at Cleveland's moves and see that as an indication on Gordon's suspension length. Plenty of OTs on the draft board and Carolina virtually ignored them. Does that mean they weren't concerned about losing both of the OTs this offseason or that they had a different plan than the draft?

But that's exactly what I'm saying. Carolina felt like they had a huge need at WR. Short of trading up higher into the first round, I'm not sure how they could have highlighted their need for WR any more than spending their first pick on Benjamin.

And for sure, none of how Carolina or Cleveland drafted may mean anything. But when we're blindly guessing, it's fun to play detective and talk about...

J

Cleveland didn't have the same benefit Carolina did at WR. Carolina was most likely already scouting WRs during the college season and as shown in the playoffs, they lacked a scoring threat in the red zone. I would bet they had Benjamin in their sites long before Cleveland had any idea that Gordon going to be suspended. I am pretty sure that Carolina knew as soon as the off-season started that Smith was likely cut and Ginn and LaFell would not be resigned.

While I used it as an example, it is a slightly different situation in that Cleveland didn't have as advanced knowledge. Still, Carolina passed on a lot of WRs and OTs and only drafted 1 WR and didn't go after any OTs/WRs in FA aside from folks that most would consider to be roster fillers not future cogs. If you asked all the pundits what Carolina needed most during FA after all the losses/retirements and before the draft, it was universally WR/OT and then DBs.

The other thing is that I liked all 3 of Cleveland's early picks and don't see any that I would change much. It is funny how people say that it is a sign that Gordon won't be out long, but I just see it as a strong draft where they got who they wanted. Reaching for a WR is not what they wanted to do and that was probably wise based on who they got and what they prepared for before the potential suspension.

Sure. Again, I think people are putting too much work in trying to build a position. The Browns certainly didn't "act" like they needed a WR in the draft. Carolina did. Does that really mean anything? We'll see.

J

When will we know?

I don't blame the Browns for acting like that. I think it is smarter to not have a knee jerk reaction and stick to your plan. Carolina's plan already included Benjamin when Carolina knew they weren't going to re-sign LaFell, Ginn and Smith and they couldn't score TDs against SF in the playoffs. Carolina's plan was happening at the same time Gordon was leading the NFL in receiving for the Browns. That is the reason I put even less stock in the Browns not drafting a WR.

When do you think Cleveland knew?

J

 

[Bronx Bomber]

I was referring to the above article or post or whatever it was speculating the league changing its policy just because an overwhelming amount of its players might get suspended due to it being embedded in the culture.

...clipped...

Probably one of the better posts I've read on any football message board in 15ish years.

Yeah, great post. To play devil's advocates though. Because the culture suggests that a majority of the players are "rule-breakers" means the NFL office will have to make a choice. They can just give in (due to pressure from sponsors, etc) or they can make a serious enough example in that those same majority will see how they will end up if they keep using and don't straighten up once they get to stage 1 (even if it is a disproportionate amount of guys on stage one). It's a game of chicken; yes the players could say screw it and let them see what type of league they'll have without us or they will give in the way the couldn't hold out any longer on the last labor talks. The money of the owners and the league won them out.

It's like teaching. My student's have a culture of being angry, aggressive, bad language, not listening...... I can either say screw it let them be or else I won't have anyone left to teach if I kick them all out. Or I can make one or two examples early in the class period if need be and assume the rest will get the message and value not getting in trouble more than having fun.

I personally don't care what they decide with weed being allowed (or looked the other way) in the NFL or not, as long as it's consistent.

 

[nirad3]

I was referring to the above article or post or whatever it was speculating the league changing its policy just because an overwhelming amount of its players might get suspended due to it being embedded in the culture.

...clipped...

Probably one of the better posts I've read on any football message board in 15ish years.

Yeah, great post. To play devil's advocates though. Because the culture suggests that a majority of the players are "rule-breakers" means the NFL office will have to make a choice. They can just give in (due to pressure from sponsors, etc) or they can make a serious enough example in that those same majority will see how they will end up if they keep using and don't straighten up once they get to stage 1 (even if it is a disproportionate amount of guys on stage one). It's a game of chicken; yes the players could say screw it and let them see what type of league they'll have without us or they will give in the way the couldn't hold out any longer on the last labor talks. The money of the owners and the league won them out.

It's like teaching. My student's have a culture of being angry, aggressive, bad language, not listening...... I can either say screw it let them be or else I won't have anyone left to teach if I kick them all out. Or I can make one or two examples early in the class period if need be and assume the rest will get the message and value not getting in trouble more than having fun.

I personally don't care what they decide with weed being allowed (or looked the other way) in the NFL or not, as long as it's consistent.

Agreed. Maybe Washington/Blackmon have been good enough "examples" and that slimeball Rosenhaus is flexing his squirrely little boy muscles to get Gordon something far more reduced. I would not discount the effect that guy - and other high-profile agents - have on the game. They are at the center of the NFL lynchpin: money.

 

[stbugs]

I see recent signings of Austin, Bennett, and Armstrong as signs of concern. Not sure why others don't.

The most recent news also has Gordon in Stage 3 prior to his latest positive test. That would mean a mandatory one year minimum suspension.

a) they're vets and "scrubs" signed on minimal contracts - only austin given an "ok deal"

b) the most recent news you're referring to is from a 1yr old report from Mary Kay Cabot, that's being recirculated

Look at who Carolina got and their WR situation was worse than Cleveland's after cutting Smith. We picked up Avant and Cotchery and drafted Benjamin. Carolina was the #2 seed in the NFC last year, so a heck of a lot more of a contender than the Browns. I don't have a dog in this fight, but I wouldn't look at Cleveland's moves and see that as an indication on Gordon's suspension length. Plenty of OTs on the draft board and Carolina virtually ignored them. Does that mean they weren't concerned about losing both of the OTs this offseason or that they had a different plan than the draft?

But that's exactly what I'm saying. Carolina felt like they had a huge need at WR. Short of trading up higher into the first round, I'm not sure how they could have highlighted their need for WR any more than spending their first pick on Benjamin.

And for sure, none of how Carolina or Cleveland drafted may mean anything. But when we're blindly guessing, it's fun to play detective and talk about...

J

Cleveland didn't have the same benefit Carolina did at WR. Carolina was most likely already scouting WRs during the college season and as shown in the playoffs, they lacked a scoring threat in the red zone. I would bet they had Benjamin in their sites long before Cleveland had any idea that Gordon going to be suspended. I am pretty sure that Carolina knew as soon as the off-season started that Smith was likely cut and Ginn and LaFell would not be resigned.

While I used it as an example, it is a slightly different situation in that Cleveland didn't have as advanced knowledge. Still, Carolina passed on a lot of WRs and OTs and only drafted 1 WR and didn't go after any OTs/WRs in FA aside from folks that most would consider to be roster fillers not future cogs. If you asked all the pundits what Carolina needed most during FA after all the losses/retirements and before the draft, it was universally WR/OT and then DBs.

The other thing is that I liked all 3 of Cleveland's early picks and don't see any that I would change much. It is funny how people say that it is a sign that Gordon won't be out long, but I just see it as a strong draft where they got who they wanted. Reaching for a WR is not what they wanted to do and that was probably wise based on who they got and what they prepared for before the potential suspension.

Sure. Again, I think people are putting too much work in trying to build a position. The Browns certainly didn't "act" like they needed a WR in the draft. Carolina did. Does that really mean anything? We'll see.

J

When will we know?

I don't blame the Browns for acting like that. I think it is smarter to not have a knee jerk reaction and stick to your plan. Carolina's plan already included Benjamin when Carolina knew they weren't going to re-sign LaFell, Ginn and Smith and they couldn't score TDs against SF in the playoffs. Carolina's plan was happening at the same time Gordon was leading the NFL in receiving for the Browns. That is the reason I put even less stock in the Browns not drafting a WR.

When do you think Cleveland knew?

J

I have no idea, but honestly based on twitter and the 24x7 news we have now, probably not that much before the story started breaking. I'm not into the black helicopter, group of people that run the world, conspiracy type stuff. I think people love to hear themselves talk and spout self-importance, so something like this where more than just the two people having an affair would know, I don't think it stays hidden long.

Do you know when they knew or when we will hear about the suspension?

 

[Joe Bryant]

I see recent signings of Austin, Bennett, and Armstrong as signs of concern. Not sure why others don't.

The most recent news also has Gordon in Stage 3 prior to his latest positive test. That would mean a mandatory one year minimum suspension.

a) they're vets and "scrubs" signed on minimal contracts - only austin given an "ok deal"

b) the most recent news you're referring to is from a 1yr old report from Mary Kay Cabot, that's being recirculated

Look at who Carolina got and their WR situation was worse than Cleveland's after cutting Smith. We picked up Avant and Cotchery and drafted Benjamin. Carolina was the #2 seed in the NFC last year, so a heck of a lot more of a contender than the Browns. I don't have a dog in this fight, but I wouldn't look at Cleveland's moves and see that as an indication on Gordon's suspension length. Plenty of OTs on the draft board and Carolina virtually ignored them. Does that mean they weren't concerned about losing both of the OTs this offseason or that they had a different plan than the draft?

But that's exactly what I'm saying. Carolina felt like they had a huge need at WR. Short of trading up higher into the first round, I'm not sure how they could have highlighted their need for WR any more than spending their first pick on Benjamin.

And for sure, none of how Carolina or Cleveland drafted may mean anything. But when we're blindly guessing, it's fun to play detective and talk about...

J

Cleveland didn't have the same benefit Carolina did at WR. Carolina was most likely already scouting WRs during the college season and as shown in the playoffs, they lacked a scoring threat in the red zone. I would bet they had Benjamin in their sites long before Cleveland had any idea that Gordon going to be suspended. I am pretty sure that Carolina knew as soon as the off-season started that Smith was likely cut and Ginn and LaFell would not be resigned.

While I used it as an example, it is a slightly different situation in that Cleveland didn't have as advanced knowledge. Still, Carolina passed on a lot of WRs and OTs and only drafted 1 WR and didn't go after any OTs/WRs in FA aside from folks that most would consider to be roster fillers not future cogs. If you asked all the pundits what Carolina needed most during FA after all the losses/retirements and before the draft, it was universally WR/OT and then DBs.

The other thing is that I liked all 3 of Cleveland's early picks and don't see any that I would change much. It is funny how people say that it is a sign that Gordon won't be out long, but I just see it as a strong draft where they got who they wanted. Reaching for a WR is not what they wanted to do and that was probably wise based on who they got and what they prepared for before the potential suspension.

Sure. Again, I think people are putting too much work in trying to build a position. The Browns certainly didn't "act" like they needed a WR in the draft. Carolina did. Does that really mean anything? We'll see.

J

When will we know?

I don't blame the Browns for acting like that. I think it is smarter to not have a knee jerk reaction and stick to your plan. Carolina's plan already included Benjamin when Carolina knew they weren't going to re-sign LaFell, Ginn and Smith and they couldn't score TDs against SF in the playoffs. Carolina's plan was happening at the same time Gordon was leading the NFL in receiving for the Browns. That is the reason I put even less stock in the Browns not drafting a WR.

When do you think Cleveland knew?

J

I have no idea, but honestly based on twitter and the 24x7 news we have now, probably not that much before the story started breaking. I'm not into the black helicopter, group of people that run the world, conspiracy type stuff. I think people love to hear themselves talk and spout self-importance, so something like this where more than just the two people having an affair would know, I don't think it stays hidden long.

Do you know when they knew or when we will hear about the suspension?

No I don't know when they knew. That was my point. I guess I misunderstood you as I thought you thought they were scrambling and didn't have time to react for the draft. My point is there are lots of things we don't know that I see people assuming they do.

J

 

[Bronco Billy]

Does Vegas have a line on the length of suspension?

 

[stbugs]

I see recent signings of Austin, Bennett, and Armstrong as signs of concern. Not sure why others don't.

The most recent news also has Gordon in Stage 3 prior to his latest positive test. That would mean a mandatory one year minimum suspension.

a) they're vets and "scrubs" signed on minimal contracts - only austin given an "ok deal"

b) the most recent news you're referring to is from a 1yr old report from Mary Kay Cabot, that's being recirculated

Look at who Carolina got and their WR situation was worse than Cleveland's after cutting Smith. We picked up Avant and Cotchery and drafted Benjamin. Carolina was the #2 seed in the NFC last year, so a heck of a lot more of a contender than the Browns. I don't have a dog in this fight, but I wouldn't look at Cleveland's moves and see that as an indication on Gordon's suspension length. Plenty of OTs on the draft board and Carolina virtually ignored them. Does that mean they weren't concerned about losing both of the OTs this offseason or that they had a different plan than the draft?

But that's exactly what I'm saying. Carolina felt like they had a huge need at WR. Short of trading up higher into the first round, I'm not sure how they could have highlighted their need for WR any more than spending their first pick on Benjamin.

And for sure, none of how Carolina or Cleveland drafted may mean anything. But when we're blindly guessing, it's fun to play detective and talk about...

J

Cleveland didn't have the same benefit Carolina did at WR. Carolina was most likely already scouting WRs during the college season and as shown in the playoffs, they lacked a scoring threat in the red zone. I would bet they had Benjamin in their sites long before Cleveland had any idea that Gordon going to be suspended. I am pretty sure that Carolina knew as soon as the off-season started that Smith was likely cut and Ginn and LaFell would not be resigned.

While I used it as an example, it is a slightly different situation in that Cleveland didn't have as advanced knowledge. Still, Carolina passed on a lot of WRs and OTs and only drafted 1 WR and didn't go after any OTs/WRs in FA aside from folks that most would consider to be roster fillers not future cogs. If you asked all the pundits what Carolina needed most during FA after all the losses/retirements and before the draft, it was universally WR/OT and then DBs.

The other thing is that I liked all 3 of Cleveland's early picks and don't see any that I would change much. It is funny how people say that it is a sign that Gordon won't be out long, but I just see it as a strong draft where they got who they wanted. Reaching for a WR is not what they wanted to do and that was probably wise based on who they got and what they prepared for before the potential suspension.

Sure. Again, I think people are putting too much work in trying to build a position. The Browns certainly didn't "act" like they needed a WR in the draft. Carolina did. Does that really mean anything? We'll see.

J

When will we know?

I don't blame the Browns for acting like that. I think it is smarter to not have a knee jerk reaction and stick to your plan. Carolina's plan already included Benjamin when Carolina knew they weren't going to re-sign LaFell, Ginn and Smith and they couldn't score TDs against SF in the playoffs. Carolina's plan was happening at the same time Gordon was leading the NFL in receiving for the Browns. That is the reason I put even less stock in the Browns not drafting a WR.

When do you think Cleveland knew?

J

I have no idea, but honestly based on twitter and the 24x7 news we have now, probably not that much before the story started breaking. I'm not into the black helicopter, group of people that run the world, conspiracy type stuff. I think people love to hear themselves talk and spout self-importance, so something like this where more than just the two people having an affair would know, I don't think it stays hidden long.

Do you know when they knew or when we will hear about the suspension?

No I don't know when they knew. That was my point. I guess I misunderstood you as I thought you thought they were scrambling and didn't have time to react for the draft. My point is there are lots of things we don't know that I see people assuming they do.

J

No my point was the opposite. I think Cleveland during the season/early off season were thinking they have an All-Pro WR and identified other needs. I think when news broke, instead of scrambling they decided to stay the course, hence not reaching for WRs and instead going with CB/QB/OL in the 1st two rounds. I agree there is a ton we don't know, so my thought is we can't read into their draft.

 

[Pots]

That is the only thing that worries anyone. But we cant consider what we dont know. The question is how long will he be suspended? If people are taking things they dont know into account over what has been made public so be it, but that doesnt seem like a smart play when making a guess to consider things you dont know.

As we know, there are known knowns; there are things that we know that we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don't know we don't know.

Am I as high as Josh Gordon or was that just really deep?

Someone watched Boondocks

 

[Bucky86]

Update?

 

[Joe Bryant]

Update?

Nothing yet. Still just pure speculation on everyone's part. Most of which we're all sure of...

J

 

[squistion]

That is the only thing that worries anyone. But we cant consider what we dont know. The question is how long will he be suspended? If people are taking things they dont know into account over what has been made public so be it, but that doesnt seem like a smart play when making a guess to consider things you dont know.

As we know, there are known knowns; there are things that we know that we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don't know we don't know.

Am I as high as Josh Gordon or was that just really deep?

Someone watched Boondocks

Or was quoting Donald Rumsfeld

 

[Gopher State]

Don't think he ever plays another NFL game, he is toast

 

[daveR]

Update?

Nothing yet. Still just pure speculation on everyone's part. Most of which we're all sure of...

J

And, when it's all said & done, we still won't know the details. <sigh>

 

[daveR]

Of course, that won't stop people from claiming they knew everything all along...

 

[Ditka Butkus]

http://www.news-herald.com/sports/20140604/bob-frantz-browns-should-cut-troubled-Gordon

Interesting read.. talks about what stage he is in. Also talks about his speeding ticket and his friend holding....It got me wondering if the NFL tested Gordon after being ticketed...His friend may have taken the fall, but that doesn't mean Gordon didn't smoke prior to being stopped and the cop smelling weed.

 

[Mene]

http://www.news-herald.com/sports/20140604/bob-frantz-browns-should-cut-troubled-Gordon

Interesting read.. talks about what stage he is in. Also talks about his speeding ticket and his friend holding....It got me wondering if the NFL tested Gordon after being ticketed...His friend may have taken the fall, but that doesn't mean Gordon didn't smoke prior to being stopped and the cop smelling weed.

If you read that article, and just look at his history of infractions since college, he strikes me as a guy who just doesn't care, or doesn't get it. He has been right on the edge since college, and at every turn decides to go back to getting high. I still think there is a good chance he won't return to the NFL. With nothing but time on his hands, which he is obviously facing with the looming suspension, I fully expect more missteps. It's a shame, but this guy strikes me as more of a tragic story than a redemption story. He has had multiple opportunities to prove he can change, and continues to be a fool.

Even if the weed in the car on memorial day was a friends, and he hadn't smoked any... he wasn't smart enough to not have weed in the car... period? It's just more poor decision making, and obviously the crowd he runs with has zero concern for him either, or they wouldn't have put him in that situation. That is all moot though, because I highly doubt he was just a designated driver for 3 stoner buddies. His history makes this an unlikely scenario.

 

[Adam Harstad]

http://www.news-herald.com/sports/20140604/bob-frantz-browns-should-cut-troubled-Gordon

Interesting read.. talks about what stage he is in. Also talks about his speeding ticket and his friend holding....It got me wondering if the NFL tested Gordon after being ticketed...His friend may have taken the fall, but that doesn't mean Gordon didn't smoke prior to being stopped and the cop smelling weed.

I'm not a big fan of the "troubled" adjective. I feel like it's often just a code-word for something else, much like "nasty" or "gritty" or "raw" or, especially, "overachiever".

Maybe this is just me injecting my own biases into it, but the article reads like a hit-piece to me, and that's from someone who agrees that Gordon likely has a problem and that problem is likely to cause more trouble in the future. The wholly uninformed speculation that the passengers in Gordon's car were "probably play[ing] rock-paper-scissors to decide who was going to take the fall" and suggesting that Gordon should pay the guy off, in particular, is way beyond the pale, even for an opinion column.

 

[Soulfly3]

http://www.news-herald.com/sports/20140604/bob-frantz-browns-should-cut-troubled-Gordon

Interesting read.. talks about what stage he is in. Also talks about his speeding ticket and his friend holding....It got me wondering if the NFL tested Gordon after being ticketed...His friend may have taken the fall, but that doesn't mean Gordon didn't smoke prior to being stopped and the cop smelling weed.

I'm not a big fan of the "troubled" adjective. I feel like it's often just a code-word for something else, much like "nasty" or "gritty" or "raw" or, especially, "overachiever".

Maybe this is just me injecting my own biases into it, but the article reads like a hit-piece to me, and that's from someone who agrees that Gordon likely has a problem and that problem is likely to cause more trouble in the future. The wholly uninformed speculation that the passengers in Gordon's car were "probably play[ing] rock-paper-scissors to decide who was going to take the fall" and suggesting that Gordon should pay the guy off, in particular, is way beyond the pale, even for an opinion column.

amen.

said the EXACT same thing in the Josh Gordon thread.

Truly a click bait piece of trash.

 

[Mene]

http://www.news-herald.com/sports/20140604/bob-frantz-browns-should-cut-troubled-Gordon

Interesting read.. talks about what stage he is in. Also talks about his speeding ticket and his friend holding....It got me wondering if the NFL tested Gordon after being ticketed...His friend may have taken the fall, but that doesn't mean Gordon didn't smoke prior to being stopped and the cop smelling weed.

I'm not a big fan of the "troubled" adjective. I feel like it's often just a code-word for something else, much like "nasty" or "gritty" or "raw" or, especially, "overachiever".

Maybe this is just me injecting my own biases into it, but the article reads like a hit-piece to me, and that's from someone who agrees that Gordon likely has a problem and that problem is likely to cause more trouble in the future. The wholly uninformed speculation that the passengers in Gordon's car were "probably play[ing] rock-paper-scissors to decide who was going to take the fall" and suggesting that Gordon should pay the guy off, in particular, is way beyond the pale, even for an opinion column.

I agree, the writer obviously has an unfavorable opinion of Gordon, and it shows in the writing. That doesn't change the fact that Gordon has failed multiple drug tests, each time knowingly facing more severe repercussions than the previous time, at multiple stops now. I am an advocate for legalization of Marijuana, I find the stigma surrounding it to be misinformed and foolish, but that doesn't change the fact that Gordon continues to buck the system, regardless of what the potential penalty is. Whether the NFL policy is draconian or not, Gordon knew the rules. Why is this situation going to be the one that turns him around? The Memorial day stop sealed it for me. If couldn't keep himself out of that situation knowing he was in the midst of an appeal, an appeal that has tremendous ramifications on his career, why should we expect anything different going forward?

 

[REDRUM26]

why is smoking weed worse than Violence against women and DUI's ?

 

[Adam Harstad]

why is smoking weed worse than Violence against women and DUI's ?

No one ever suggested it was. The problem for Gordon is that he's starting to accumulate strikes, and the program includes escalating punishments. Gordon's punishment for his first strike was much, much lighter than Rice's punishment will be. Gordon's punishment for his second strike probably will wind up being lighter, too. But now Gordon's on his third strike, and the league has it set up so that repeatedly violating the substance abuse policy carries stiffer penalties than violating the personal conduct policy one time.

Edit: for comparison, it's like habitual offender laws, like California's notorious "three strikes" law. Nobody suggests possession or distribution of drugs is a worse offense than, say, running a dogfighting ring... and yet Timothy Tyler is serving life in prison for mailing LSD to a friend of his while Michael Vick is playing for the Jets. It's unimaginably stupid, but it's how the rules were written.

 

[Bruce Hammond]

I think we get the announcement tomorrow (Friday). They got the announcements on Hill and Washington out of the way earlier, clearing the way for the inevitable media crush that will ensue with the Gordon announcement. However it goes there will be a lot of questions and opinions and buzz (maybe the wrong word to use under the circumstances), and the NFL wants to be as undistracted by other things as possible when dealing with this. Plus it's Friday, always a good day for getting bad news out there because a lot more people are paying attention to their own plans.

FTR I'd bet everything in my front left pocket it's an indefinite suspension with request for reinstatement in a year, but the paper clip, gray lint, and 27 cents in that pocket aren't worth much.

 

[mquinnjr]

I think we get the announcement tomorrow (Friday). They got the announcements on Hill and Washington out of the way earlier, clearing the way for the inevitable media crush that will ensue with the Gordon announcement. However it goes there will be a lot of questions and opinions and buzz (maybe the wrong word to use under the circumstances), and the NFL wants to be as undistracted by other things as possible when dealing with this. Plus it's Friday, always a good day for getting bad news out there because a lot more people are paying attention to their own plans.

FTR I'd bet everything in my front left pocket it's an indefinite suspension with request for reinstatement in a year, but the paper clip, gray lint, and 27 cents in that pocket aren't worth much.

It is smack dab in the middle of the NHL and NBA finals, would make sense.

 

[Bruce Hammond]

I think we get the announcement tomorrow (Friday). They got the announcements on Hill and Washington out of the way earlier, clearing the way for the inevitable media crush that will ensue with the Gordon announcement. However it goes there will be a lot of questions and opinions and buzz (maybe the wrong word to use under the circumstances), and the NFL wants to be as undistracted by other things as possible when dealing with this. Plus it's Friday, always a good day for getting bad news out there because a lot more people are paying attention to their own plans.

FTR I'd bet everything in my front left pocket it's an indefinite suspension with request for reinstatement in a year, but the paper clip, gray lint, and 27 cents in that pocket aren't worth much.

It is smack dab in the middle of the NHL and NBA finals, would make sense.

But no NHL or NBA game tomorrow. At least they can't be accused of upstaging anyone.

 

[Franknbeans]

Does anyone have the cliffsnotes version to what Gordon was saying?

Gordon, I mean this with no disrespect, I always want to read what you have to say but I just cant because I have no time to read the 12 paragraphs you always write.

It's not about weed, it's about money... 8 games

 

[KellysHeroes]

Fred Davis went bye bye for weed, just remember that.

Gordon was placed in stage 2 when entering the league, violated it last yr but was with "cough medicine" and was able to provide something so the league reduced his sentence to 2 games but 4 game checks. More than likely placed in stage 3 at that point but don't ask Josh because he didn't even know. Gets popped again along with getting pulled over with weed in his car... even if he somehow doesn't get the 1 year theres no way this kid stays clean.

 

[Soulfly3]

gonna be funny when ppl find out he didn't even fail a piss test, but missed it.

OH BUT HE'LL NEVER BE CLEAN!!!

 

[socrates]

gonna be funny when ppl find out he didn't even fail a piss test, but missed it.

OH BUT HE'LL NEVER BE CLEAN!!!

Link?

 

[King of the Jungle]

gonna be funny when ppl find out he didn't even fail a piss test, but missed it.

OH BUT HE'LL NEVER BE CLEAN!!!

It won't be funny if he still misses a year. All I care about is how much time he is going to miss and if he will ever play again.

 

[Bronx Bomber]

gonna be funny when ppl find out he didn't even fail a piss test, but missed it.

OH BUT HE'LL NEVER BE CLEAN!!!

Even more reason to punish him from the league perspective. Everyone would just miss tests to buy more time to get clean. Same crap we pulled when I was younger.

 

[KellysHeroes]

gonna be funny when ppl find out he didn't even fail a piss test, but missed it.

OH BUT HE'LL NEVER BE CLEAN!!!

missed the test but gets pulled over with weed in the car, I'm sure hes clean

 

[Soulfly3]

gonna be funny when ppl find out he didn't even fail a piss test, but missed it.

OH BUT HE'LL NEVER BE CLEAN!!!

missed the test but gets pulled over with weed in the car, I'm sure hes clean

He's around a bunch of potheads in the locker room everyday too.

What's your point?

 

[Phenix]

 

[mquinnjr]

gonna be funny when ppl find out he didn't even fail a piss test, but missed it.

OH BUT HE'LL NEVER BE CLEAN!!!

Link?

 

[mquinnjr]

gonna be funny when ppl find out he didn't even fail a piss test, but missed it.

OH BUT HE'LL NEVER BE CLEAN!!!

Why is that funny? If he did miss the test it was because he knew he wouldn't pass......#samethingasnotpassing #doesntchangeanything

Please don't do that here.

Thanks,

Everyone

 

[nirad3]

gonna be funny when ppl find out he didn't even fail a piss test, but missed it.

OH BUT HE'LL NEVER BE CLEAN!!!

Why is that funny? If he did miss the test it was because he knew he wouldn't pass......#samethingasnotpassing #doesntchangeanything

Please don't do that here.

Thanks,

Everyone

 

[squistion]

gonna be funny when ppl find out he didn't even fail a piss test, but missed it.

OH BUT HE'LL NEVER BE CLEAN!!!

Why is that funny? If he did miss the test it was because he knew he wouldn't pass......#samethingasnotpassing #doesntchangeanything

Please don't do that here.

Thanks,

Everyone

Do what? Do you have some issue with using hashtags? I don't see what the problem is.