<![CDATA[Could We Still See Gordon This Year?]]>NFLPA chief DeMaurice Smith told a Washington radio station Friday that, in talks with the NFL about a new policy for performance-enhancing drugs, the union will seek to reverse suspensions that occurred this year but are based retroactively to the previous policy.

"We don't want players to suffer because the union and league couldn't get it done before the league year," Smith told 106.7 The Fan, adding that the union would not agree to any policy that punishes players on simply being arrested.

ESPN's Chris Mortensen and Adam Schefter reported Thursday that the NFL is seeking to be able to punish players after an arrest but before the legal process plays out. The negotiations have been described as "fragile."

Two star receivers, Wes Welker of the Denver Broncos and Josh Gordon of the Cleveland Browns, are under suspension for drug violations -- Welker for four games for amphetamines and Gordon for all of the 2014 season for another positive marijuana test.

Multiple sources told ESPN.com Friday that the Broncos believe if the league and union hammer out a new policy before Welker's suspension is completed, he would be reinstated. Cleveland.com, citing league sources, also reported Gordon might be eligible for reinstatement if a revamped drug policy is approved.

Welker's suspension, though, fell under the league's policy for PEDs. Under the guidelines for PEDs, players are suspended for the first flagged positive test. Broncos sources believe that under the proposed new drug policy, those stimulants would be characterized under the league's policy for substance abuse.

Under those guidelines, a player enters the treatment program with the first positive test. The program includes meeting with counselors, and the player is subject to increased testing each month. It takes multiple positive tests under the substance-abuse policy before the suspension phase is reached.

Welker's suspension was officially announced by the league Tuesday. The Broncos had made their roster cutdown to 53 players over the weekend and were somewhat frustrated with the timing, given the league's transaction report had already been sent out to each team Tuesday before Welker's suspension was announced.

"Ideally, me personally, obviously it wasn't great timing because we'd picked our roster," Broncos coach John Fox said this week. " ... I would have preferred maybe it was last week, if you're asking me my preference. But I don't know that that matters too much. It is what it is. We'll move on without him."

]]>https://brownsboard.com/topic/30152/could-we-still-see-gordon-this-yearRSS for NodeFri, 02 Oct 2026 07:49:33 GMTSat, 06 Sep 2014 14:19:03 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Thu, 18 Sep 2014 17:34:22 GMT]]>plenty of non-Browns-fan's out there "head-hunting" saying JG should still get the year instead of the 10 game suspension. these folks are also the aforementioned naysayers that think he has violated 4X...as opposed to 2 and a frog hair over the mj threshold.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/434476https://brownsboard.com/post/434476Thu, 18 Sep 2014 17:34:22 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Thu, 18 Sep 2014 16:55:25 GMT]]>Probably dead, but does not make it right... Still plenty of talking heads wondering how the League office can be so arbitrary.

In my view the most important thing the NFLPA got out of the new deal is an independent arbitrator whose contract they have the power to terminate.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/434469https://brownsboard.com/post/434469Thu, 18 Sep 2014 16:55:25 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Thu, 18 Sep 2014 16:44:04 GMT]]>Exactly. I think we're on the same page there. Just answering your question on if it's a dead topic. I know its not for a lot of people all hung up on the ruling. But I aint one of them. I say screw him. IF he comes back, then Great. If not, Oh well.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/434466https://brownsboard.com/post/434466Thu, 18 Sep 2014 16:44:04 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Thu, 18 Sep 2014 16:35:01 GMT]]>it'll never happen and i just typed out why.

and i didn't need to quote ya to tell ya.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/434463https://brownsboard.com/post/434463Thu, 18 Sep 2014 16:35:01 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Thu, 18 Sep 2014 16:28:14 GMT]]>

@sisky-fringo said:

so is this topic dead now?

writing is on the wall...seems dude has major entitlement issues topped off with no loyalty to us. i suspect he can't wait for the day he leaves Cleveland and becomes a "big star".

different shit, same day.

Yawwwwn. Its dead to me. Whatever. I suspect we can't wait for the day he shows up for work. Wake me when he can become a "big star" here. k?

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/434461https://brownsboard.com/post/434461Thu, 18 Sep 2014 16:28:14 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Thu, 18 Sep 2014 15:38:15 GMT]]>so is this topic dead now?

between the speculation and the B.S. being piled on everywhere i look by casual readers who comment without close knowledge to the situation...all claiming Gordon has had four fails. FOUR!

he had the first undisclosed one, the purple drank codeine one, and the 16ng one. that's IT! what they won't accept is he voluntarily placed himself in Stage 3...and you can scream at them indefinitely and they just don't get it. Josh bet on himself and lost. and has thanked everyone for standing beside him except the Cleveland fans.

writing is on the wall...seems dude has major entitlement issues topped off with no loyalty to us. i suspect he can't wait for the day he leaves Cleveland and becomes a "big star".

different shit, same day.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/434445https://brownsboard.com/post/434445Thu, 18 Sep 2014 15:38:15 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Tue, 09 Sep 2014 02:12:23 GMT]]>
LA - theOBR @LaneAdkins · 7m NFLPA close to pulling a rabbit named Josh Gordon out of a hat -- suspension not lifted yet, but significant progress made

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2014/09/josh_gordon_could_be_re-instat_1.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

BEREA, Ohio -- Josh Gordon could take another big step on his comeback route Tuesday.

The NFL's 32 players reps will vote on the new drug policy Tuesday, according to ESPN's Chris Mortensen.

And depending on the way the new policy is written, Gordon could have his suspension overturned and return to the Browns as soon as the agreement is reached.

Under terms of the new agreement, Gordon wouldn't have tested positive for marijuana, and therefore, he wouldn't have been banned indefinitely. The NFL and NFLPA are reportedly set to bump the marijuana metabolite threshold up from 15 ng/mil to 50. Gordon's positive test was a 16, sources have told cleveland.com.

Gordon, who's appeal was rejected on Aug. 27, is currently suspended indefinitely, but at least for the entire 2014 season.

Whether or not Gordon is re-instated will depend on what the two sides agree on: allowing players back in that tested positive in the new league year beginning Mar. 11, or players that were ultimately suspended in the new league year. A source told cleveland.com that Gordon tested positive no later than February, which was in the previous league year.

Mortenson also reported that a late point of contention is that if the NFL allows suspended players such as Gordon and Denver's Wes Welker back in, other NFL owners will fight to have their suspended players re-instated. The NFL has already begun receiving complaints from owners who want their players re-instated.

Even if Gordon's drug ban is rescinded, he might still be suspended for his pending DWI charge in Raleigh, N.C.

According to profootballtalk.com, the NFL is seeking a minimum two-game suspension for a first-time DWI conviction. Gordon's hearing in Raleigh for the July 5th DWI was postponed from Aug. 26 to November while he went through the appeals process.

In addition, the league wants players to be de-activated with pay for the game following any DUI arrest -- before due process.

So as it stands, Gordon might make it back as early this week's game against the Saints, but could miss two games in November for the DWI.

Last season, Gordon was also suspended for two games -- for what he said was codeine his cough syrup -- and still managed to lead the NFL with 1,646 yards.

It's unclear who the Browns new player rep is now that D'Qwell Jackson is gone.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/431615https://brownsboard.com/post/431615Tue, 09 Sep 2014 02:12:23 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:55:52 GMT]]>

@5150k9 said:

Mort said on MNF, that if the policy is approved, Welker and Gordon would be reinstated immediately because they didn't technically violate the new rule.

Playoffs.

Zombo

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/431612https://brownsboard.com/post/431612Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:55:52 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:43:02 GMT]]>One thing that can be said about the receivers yesterday. Were there any dropped passes? I mean the blatant Greg Little hitting them square in the chest type drops that we've all grown used to over the years. If there was more than 1 or 2, I'm certainly not remembering them.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/431608https://brownsboard.com/post/431608Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:43:02 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:42:57 GMT]]>Mort said on MNF, that if the policy is approved, Welker and Gordon would be reinstated immediately because they didn't technically violate the new rule.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/431607https://brownsboard.com/post/431607Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:42:57 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:40:27 GMT]]>Gordon - Hawkins - Benjamin - Gabriel ... with a healthy Cameron ... to go along with Tate/West/Crowell... I'd like that

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/431606https://brownsboard.com/post/431606Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:40:27 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:25:19 GMT]]>Blackmon is not even talking to the jags organization. He won't come back

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/431598https://brownsboard.com/post/431598Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:25:19 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:13:12 GMT]]>I don't know how badly Blackmon flunked his pee test but gordon was definitely ticky tack shit.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/431588https://brownsboard.com/post/431588Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:13:12 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:10:17 GMT]]>If he comes back it would be nice

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/431586https://brownsboard.com/post/431586Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:10:17 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:10:56 GMT]]>http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11491428/nfl-players-association-vote-revised-drug-policy

NFLPA to vote on new drug policy

The NFL Players Association will take a vote Tuesday among its 32 player representatives on a radically revised drug policy after a daylong face-to-face negotiation with the league in New York, according to player sources.

The proposed policy will include human growth hormone testing for the first time, as well as make significant changes that raise limits for marijuana testing and expand neutral arbitration, sources said.

The two sides still have some disagreement on proposed issues, but the NFLPA agreed to take the league's latest proposal to the player reps for a vote. The union informed the majority of its player reps Monday evening of the development. Four others are involved in the Monday night double-header.

One late sticking point is that the league has received complaints and concerns from owners regarding possible reinstatement for recently suspended players such as Josh Gordon of the Cleveland Browns and Wes Welker of the Denver Broncos, who would not have been suspended under the proposed policy. Those owners were displeased that a new agreement would not necessarily alter the standing of their own suspended players.

Nevertheless, there are numerous unidentified players in the league's substance-abuse program who would benefit from the changes, sources said.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/431585https://brownsboard.com/post/431585Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:10:56 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:05:36 GMT]]>If they could change rices suspension they can change Gordons

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/431582https://brownsboard.com/post/431582Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:05:36 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:01:17 GMT]]>Love to see Gordon paired up with the other young guys on Sunday.

Cleveland will be rocking!

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/431576https://brownsboard.com/post/431576Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:01:17 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Tue, 09 Sep 2014 00:53:30 GMT]]>Rumor's out that the NFLPA will vote tomorrow on the new Drug testing tomorrow.

Dawg Pound Nation ‏@DawgPoundNews 1h Per Chris Mortensen, the NFLPA will vote on the new drug policy tomorrow. Could have big implications for the #Browns.

And

Tom Reed ‏@treed1919 1h Obviously this could have huge implications for Josh Gordon. As of last week #Browns did not have a player rep. D'Qwell was player rep.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/431572https://brownsboard.com/post/431572Tue, 09 Sep 2014 00:53:30 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Tue, 09 Sep 2014 00:53:17 GMT]]>per Chris Mortensen...

NFL - ESPN.com - Go.com

espn.go.com/nfl/

ESPN

mortreport Chris Mortensen NFLPA will have 32 player reps vote Tuesday on a proposed overhauled drug policy after daylong negotiations, per sources.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/431571https://brownsboard.com/post/431571Tue, 09 Sep 2014 00:53:17 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Tue, 09 Sep 2014 00:56:08 GMT]]>Just heard it on the halftime show. 32 player reps to vote on it tomorrow. Would have had the vote today but 4 reps had games today.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/431569https://brownsboard.com/post/431569Tue, 09 Sep 2014 00:56:08 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Sun, 07 Sep 2014 14:35:33 GMT]]>Plus 1 on that....I was thinking if he missed a game, then they rescinded the suspension, they would owe him(and the Browns) one game you cant get back.....sooooo, a trade seems reasonable to me too

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/430751https://brownsboard.com/post/430751Sun, 07 Sep 2014 14:35:33 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Sun, 07 Sep 2014 14:33:34 GMT]]>Right now there is no suspension penalty for a 1st time DUI, only a two-game fine. The proposal is that there be a one-game suspension, the same as Josh may end up with for his "no-longer-a-positive-test" banned substance suspension...

I smell package deal... namely time served...

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/430750https://brownsboard.com/post/430750Sun, 07 Sep 2014 14:33:34 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Sun, 07 Sep 2014 14:11:51 GMT]]>

@hoorta said:

The other hang up is the NFL insisting on being able to suspend a player on arrest for DUI. Shove it Goodell. Remember that guy Jim Irsay? Hell, based on initial evidence he was charged with felony drug possession. http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24488636/colts-owner-jim-irsay-arrested-charged-with-owi

You let that one play out in the courts- of course Irsay signs your paychecks.

It is amazing that the NFLPA ever agreed to allow DUI suspensions prior to conviction. It is mind boggling to me that that type of suspension wouldn't be overturned in any court of law in the nation. You would think it easy to get an injunction against the suspension pending the outcome of the DUI in court. Anyone who has ever been suspended, sat out the games, lost the paychecks and then beat it in court should be due reparation.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/430746https://brownsboard.com/post/430746Sun, 07 Sep 2014 14:11:51 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Could We Still See Gordon This Year? on Sun, 07 Sep 2014 14:04:59 GMT]]>

@topdawg31 said:

If Gordon does manage to see the field next week, can he stay clean enough to remain on it? I have my doubts.

Yeah, I dont have much faith in him myself. Especially with the looming DUI. .....

Im just not planning on him being here, so IF he is, Ill consider it a bonus....but not losing any sleep over it.

Plus, I think if he comes back, he'll be gone again as soon as that DUI gets reviewed......when was that....oct nov?

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/430745https://brownsboard.com/post/430745Sun, 07 Sep 2014 14:04:59 GMT