Browns “fairly certain” to not have Josh Gordon for at least part of the year


It’s been 20 days since the Josh Gordon appeal hearing ended.  While no ruling has been issued, the Browns are bracing for something bad.

Gordon didn’t play on Saturday night against the Rams, five days after playing into the fourth quarter against Washington.  On Sunday, coach Mike Pettine said he wasn’t sending a message to Gordon, who at times seemed lackadaisical and disinterested on Monday night.

“Knowing that there is — the decision is looming that we’re fairly certain that we’re not going to have him for at minimum some part of the year so we wanted to make sure we were getting repetitions with the guys that are going to be out there early,” Pettine told reporters, via 92.3 The Fan in Cleveland.  “It wasn’t anything from a punishment standpoint or anything like that.  It was just common sense.”

As written, the substance-abuse policy contemplates either no suspension or a full-year ban, with no middle ground other than something that would be negotiated by and between the NFL and the NFLPA.  While no negotiations have occurred on a potential settlement, those discussions could start at any time, especially if hearing officer Harold Henderson chooses to twist some arms toward an agreement that would avoid the necessity of forcing Gordon out of football for 365 days.

37 responses to “Browns “fairly certain” to not have Josh Gordon for at least part of the year

  1. The penalties, across the board, need to be severe if the NFL wants to maintain a good image. Given the fact that Gordon’s situation is a part of the CBA he should be gone for a year. Period.

  2. Agreements such as the CBA usually have provisions to handle disputes etc…

    Since the decision is supposed to come in a “reasonable” amount of time…

    What if someone challenges this as NOT coming within a reasonable amount of time?

    Anyone know if anything is in place that governs a dispute about the time frame?

  3. Based on the facts we all know by now (70+ passed tests over the past year, only one failed test which included one specimen under the acceptable limit, the other slightly above and the “average” below the limit, that the NFL wanted to raise the acceptable limit from 15ng to 100ng if player also agreed to HGH testing, the fact the NFL is researching medical marijuana for pain and concussion treatment instead of using opium-based pills), JOSH GORDON SHOULD NOT BE SUSPENDED AT ALL.


  4. “Reasonable” is subjective. The rules he broke, however, aren’t. Get over it. Bye bye, loser. We’ll see you in 2 months when you fail another drug test.

  5. I know A LOT of people doubt the second-hand smoke theory, but I really think it’s the case here.

    Marijuana is fat soluble, and it is absorbed in the body’s fat cells. It stays in your system for 30 days or more.

    So knowing that Josh has passed 70+ tests in the past year, which is more than 1x/week, if he was using marijuana, he would have flunked other tests! But he didn’t.

    The reason the OLYMPICS raised their acceptable standards to 150 ng (or 10x the NFL standards) is that THEIR RESEARCH AND DOCTORS concluded that, YES, it is possible for second-hand smoke to register at 15ng or more.

    You may say, “well, you shouldn’t be hanging around those people”, but we don’t know how/where he was exposed to it. Contrary to the NFL’s PED “you are responsible for what you PUT in your body”, people can’t control the air around them. What if he was in the VIP section of a club (the NFL has no problems with alcohol) and people around him were smoking? What if he was hanging out with a girlfriend and she was smoking?


  6. I hope they suspend him for a year. Then I hope that his lawyers go to court and shove it down the NFL’s throat!!!! Ohio law will control as federal courts including the supreme court have held in the past..see starcaps case. Gordon will play as the 2 year court case drags on and he will win.

  7. What does a year prove now? That the NFL can adhere to its rules? I guess. But it seems a tad odd that in a case where they (or the lab) screwed up, they would adhere to a rule when they have the chance to make the screw-up right.

  8. Based on Ohio state law, the test is negative. As stated above, the federal courts have always held that state law shall supersede any collective-bargaining agreement.

  9. The NFL is screwed on this one. After all the public uproar on the Ray Rice ruling, Goodell sends his lackey onto the Mike and Mike show to take the questions. Not a big Geenberg fan but for once he didn’t serve up marshmellow questions which were badly answered and made the fiasco even worse. Appoint another lackey to make this decision and now weeks later Goodell is hunkered down in his bunker hoping the start of the regular season makes this all go away. Too late Rog, step up to the plate and start earning your multi-million dollar salary. Whatever is ruled and whoever the messenger is the public will be outraged.

  10. The Joke is young people risk making such an exceptional living for any kind of nonsense like this. How about waiting for decision and then getting DUI ,no one even talking about that.

  11. Pettine really needs to learn to shut his piehole. Why announce that you’re anticipating (and by implication, accepting) a negative result?

  12. Who cares it’s a new beginning and same ending every year they talk about this and how there going to do that the bottom line they still stink every year.

  13. I hope they go easy on him – I just drafted him in the 11th round of my fantasy draft.

  14. This should have been decided weeks ago. Why is it so hard to make a decision re suspension.
    Goodell’s total inability to come to a conclusion is just incompetence.
    It’s a pity that Cleveland is trying to put a team together and doesn’t know where it stands with it’s best Offensive player. If this was the Giants or Patriots or Steelers or Ravens, it would have been resolved many weeks ago.

  15. Why should he walk? He knew the rules and broke them again and THEN drove drunk. Stop making excuses for this guy who is throwing away his golden opportunity in life.

  16. For everyone saying that the people who support lessening the suspension or doing away with it altogether are making excuses for Gordon, did you ever stop to think that maybe he really didn’t smoke? If he’s taking more than 1 drug test a week, AND smoking, his tests levels would have been much much higher. That said, if it were you, wouldn’t you fight the suspension if you knew you didn’t commit the offense? Also, it’s easy to assume that Gordon is guilty because of his past behavior, but when does his past become his past and people stop doubting him?

  17. This is a tough one. As much as I despise Goods… I understand his dilemna on this one. If he suspends Gordon for the year he is theoretically obligated to do, it will only bring down a second giant wave of negative public opinion and rehash the “wife beaters get two games and pot smokers lose their job for a year” outcry. If he significantly reduces the suspension, not only does he “set precedent” for others who may fail a test while in stage 3, but he will be further blasted for being completely arbitrary in his decisions.

    This is a no win for Goods. He should just fall on the sword sooner rather than later. Get it over with, and hope week 1 of the season is so awesome that everyone has something else to talk about.

  18. How nice would it be to go to work everyday like Goodell & not have to do your job but still make your tens of millions per year?

  19. The NFL knows it’s screwed here, hence why they have not announced a suspension. They are stalling praying for Gordon’s team to agree to a settlement. 70 negative test over the course of a year, then one very faint positive test, with a negative test from the same sample. Of which the positive test meets no other regulatory bodies’ standards for a positive test. Goodell is praying for a settlement to avoid a PR nightmare, while Gordon’s team knows that they can beat this in court. This is what has caused the current stalemate. The DUI is an infraction of a different policy than substance abuse, so this has no bearing on this. The longer this drags out, the more it makes you think that he could get off with nothing. There’s no way he’s getting a year suspension.


Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!