"@beachbum , Isn't it possible that an NFL spokesperson, while responding to a question from the media about Josh Gordon's status..." I understand. There is no logical answer as to why a league spokesman would answer the way he did unless the league were involved in some way. There was no reason for him to respond at all (assuming he was even asked). That's an easy one. They are protecting him like they always have. I'm not there so probably not fair of me to say but I think you could make the argument that all the years of coddling JG has experienced from the Browns has been a disservice to him. The guy can do anything he wants and they never so much as offer a harsh word. Almost made me puke when I heard Jackson say, "The Eagle has landed" on hard knocks last week. Are you kidding me? When did this guy become the savior of the franchise? Very poor message to send not only to Josh but to the rest of the team. I'm gonna guess Callaway has HBO. That guy probably thinks he's bulletproof after that comment.
I see your point, Beach. On the morning of August 18th, Brian McCarthey must have woke up and decided to email an unsolicied answer to the AP (Associated Press - a member of the media). Then he did the same when he woke up on the morning of August 25th. So, no . . . You didn't introduce the narrative of responding to the media . . . We did.
I guess I'm doing a poor job of explaining myself. The narrative I've accused you (and Irish) of introducing is that McCarthy's emails ARE A RESPONSE TO THE MEDIA. McCarthy, as a spokesman of the NFL is often tasked with distributing unsolicited press briefings done in the form of a email to the AP.
That's a bullshit counterpoint and you know it is. In other words, McCarthy woke up on August 18th and 25th and decided (or was tasked with) sending out answers to questions that haven't been asked?
Yes Lyman, NFL spokespeople send out press briefings all the time often in anticipation of obvious questions. The NFL would have been the first person to be notified of the Browns transaction (activation). In anticipation, it's completely natural for them to send out a briefing via the AP on Gordon's status unsolicited. It's also completely natural for them stay silent on a subject they don't care to talk about. What is not completely natural is for them to comment on ordinary roster transactions. BTW, you still haven't answered the question as to why the NFI was ever necessary? Why wasn't he simply reinstated last week? You guys can come up with all the theories you want but the most obvious thing staring everyone else in the face was that the NFI was a reaction to the status the NFL placed him under. You want to put the egg before the chicken and suggest the Browns for no obvious reason placed him on the NFI instead of simply resinstating to the roster (as they did 6 days later WITH a bad hamstring). And then the NFL decided they would explain to the world what it means to be on NFI? Why? The more obvious scenario was the league wouldn't clear Gordon to practice and the Browns at the very least wanted to get Josh involved in meetings and start working on his conditioning. Their vehicle was to put him on the NFI. There is simply no logical reason for a two-step process back to the roster. They have 90 spots open and although I don't know exactly how many players they had on the roster I have yet to hear about a corresponding waiver to offset the addition of Gordon yesterday. It leads me to believe they were already under the 90. The notion that all these newspapers, websites, blogs and TV personalities got it wrong and you and Irish were able to read between the lines and sniff out the truth is pretty silly.
One last fucking time, Beach. Josh Gordon was NOT under any league sanctioned restrictions. He was placed on the Active NFI list BY THE BROWNS, not the league. Here's a brief description of the NFI designation I found while researching the topic: The NFI list is largely similar to the PUP List, except this is for players who suffered their injuries unrelated to NFL football (i.e. away from NFL team activities). Ironically, despite its name, the NFI also covers injuries sustained during activities such as college football. The Active/NFI designation means players can return to practice at any time once medically cleared by the team. The Reserve/NFI designation is applied to players who will not return to the active roster during the current season. Typically, this would be applied to rookies who enter the league with a pre-existing injury [think Jaylon Smith] and have the equivalent of a red-shirt season. The reason you never saw a roster transaction by the Browns when they (the Browns) removed Gordon from the NFI list is because he was on the Active NFI list and was already included in the roster head count and cap space calculations. If, Gordon was included on a league mandated sanction list (as you are suggesting), he would not have been included on the Browns active roster.
Then provide one link that states that Gordon required league approval to return. Not some ambiguous generic press release, one link that specifically states that Josh Gordon required NFL league approval in order to return to the Browns' day to day activities. I'll wait . . .
Beach...for the love of.... Do you have any theories on Kennedy's assassination? This topic is getting old.... One last simple time.... When Gordon showed up last week, the Browns had to make a designation, he was no longer on the Did not report list, because...He reported. You with me so far? They also could not simply add him to the active list without another designation because he has not been through any of the pre-training camp exercises for all reporting players...so they put him on the active/non football injury list designation, so that as soon as he was cleared for practice, they could simply take him off the NFI list...This allowed him to a) participate in all non practice related activities b) give the team time to out him through all necessary physical tests and activities to make sure he is ready to jump into a practice that all others have already completed training camp. NOW, given that he passed all those tests, they simply removed him from the NFI designation list. What is the meat and potatoes of your theory, since we are still talking about it? Are you suggesting, after suspending him for an amount THC less than the league designation in two of the three samples...Then suspending him again for a couple of beers at the end of a plane trip AFTER the Browns season ended, but before the league season ended...That the league is trying desperately to find a way to NOT suspend him after violating NFL rules? Please explain this theory for me...
NFL: Josh Gordon can go to meetings and participate in walk-thrus but he can't practice. At this time I can't tell you when he will be allowed to practice. Lym: Says who?
Bullshit. There was nothing preventing them from adding him to the roster just like they did a week later with a bad hamstring. You are making this up as you go along. Hue: Hey Josh we can't add you to the roster because we need to make sure you're physically ready. Josh: Hey coach, I injured my hamstring. Hue: Oh cool, time to put you on the roster then!
The prevailing theory on the Browns board, as stated here by you, is that the Browns have been hiding Josh Gordon from Hard Knocks. I don't think you or anyone claiming similarly is in a position to bash potential conspiracy theories...
I asked for a link, not a quote. That's precisely what the league's NFI list says a player can do. You know why whoever said that couldn't say when he will be allowed to practise? Because the team, not the league makes that determination.
Hey Einstein...He was added to the roster, he was on the active roster taking a roster spot. He simply was designated NFI because he had not passed a physical and/or went through the BROWNS conditioning to be up to speed...It is a DESIGNATION, and when he was designated, the NFL clarified for all of you that wanted an explanation so badly, under said designation "NFL: Josh Gordon can go to meetings and participate in walk-thrus but he can't practice."...except that you were wrong, he could NOT participate in walk throughs while on the NFI list... All he could do is go to meetings and participate in personal exercises and conditioning, he could not practice OR participate in team walk throughs. Once he satisfied all of the testing, hamstring and all, he had to be taken off the NFI list in order to participate in walk throughs. This is not nearly as difficult as you are making it out to be...
The point of the post is that the subject is getting old, not bashing potential conspiracy theories, but thanks for playing...
Then the "Kennedy assassination theory" quip was awfully oddly placed, for a comment supposedly not about conspiracy theories... but that's cool, too.
It was about changing the subject...made clear by.... "This topic is getting old" You never seem to quite get ALL the pertinent information when you make an attempt at a rebuttal.
Keeping Gordon away from Hard Knocks theory isn't as far out there as you may think. The show could've added that much more stress to him and his processes, especially since he's trying to walk the line. Additional camera attention could impact how he handles shit like what he's going through. He probably has some established coping mechanisms and the tv show could've thrown that out of whack just a bit. Or enough for him to need a break. Maybe Gordon was protecting Gordon and the FO concurred. I honestly don't know the absolute answer, but knowing people who've gone through addiction recovery, therapy, etc., it's not that big of a reach. I could see that possibly being the case here.
Yeah. I could buy that too, but it has nothing to do with any NFL involvement. I actually think it was a good strategy, if in fact that is what it was.
For fuck's sake, Irish - you could've picked any other reference about something getting old in the whole world, and you picked the one most closely associated with crackpot conspiracy theories... Much like this subject being argued, there are multiple potentially valid points of view. Let's cut out the bitchy quips, huh?
