Is Josh Gordon Too Toxic?

[getnasty]

I have no problem with Pete and John taking a chance on Gordon for the right price. Like said before what if we never gave Marshawn a chance? Plus Pete and John have shown that if you aren't working out they'll send you down the road.

 

[canfan]

I don't know. Can anybody see him blocking and not complaining about lack of targets? He's a knucklehead who runs bad routes and has made the Brown's offense worse this year. He is too lazy and undisciplined to make use of his God given talent. Leave him where he is.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I don't know. Can anybody see him blocking and not complaining about lack of targets? He's a knucklehead who runs bad routes and has made the Brown's offense worse this year. He is too lazy and undisciplined to make use of his God given talent. Leave him where he is.

I would absolutely take a chance on Gordon for a 4th or 5th round pick. Dude has too much skill to ignore.

Plus how much of this is Cleveland being Cleveland? If the Browns aren't the most dysfunctional organization in sports, they're top 5. Maybe coming to a super tight knit professionally run organization like the Hawks would work for Gordon.

But my guess is if Cleveland dangles him out as trade bait, they'd want higher draft picks than I'd be willing to give.

 

[kearly]

I think this is like trading for Lendale White. I could see Seattle dealing the equivalent of a sixth round pick and then cutting Gordon six weeks later. While obviously not a good trade, it didn't really hurt Seattle much either.

With Seattle virtually a lock to get the max number of compensatory picks this year (four), it makes a lot of sense to take the risk, even if the chance for success is low.

If anyone is looking for that mythical 2007 Randy Moss trade situation, this is it.

 

[TheRealDTM]

we need him, other than OL biggest need would be filled and it would only take 1 move to do it. Its a must.

 

[ZagHawk]

I think Seattle has a pretty poor ROI when it comes to trades for WRs/TEs recently. I mean yeah sure we have seen some brilliant plays from Sidney, Percy and Miller. But overall what was given to get them and again the ROI, I just feel like TE and WR for the Hawks needs to be developed in house for a while. lol unless they suddenly manage to get OBJ.

 

[Spin Doctor]

I would have no qualms picking up Josh Gordon, in fact I would welcome him with open arms for the right price. If he could be had for a fourth or lower I would take a flyer on him. As a player he has proven that he is one of the best wide receivers in the league when he was surrounded by garbage. Not only that, but he is exactly the big target that this team so desperately needs, he would be a difference maker from day one in Seahawks blue. Some may point to Percy Harvin, but they both had different reasons why they were disowned by their teams, and entirely different skillsets.

Harvin was disowned because he was a DIVA. He wanted to play the game on his terms, and only when he felt like it. If anyone called him out he would embark on a rage filled warpath. Gordon is just an idiot plain and simple. He likes the drugs, he likes the party life -- he lacks maturity and direction. I've never heard of him being a major distraction, or venomous character like Harvin has been.

Unlike Cleveland, Seattle has a strong, established leadership, and culture. Seattle knows who they are and they are and they wear it on their sleeve every game. The Seahawks are a team filled with strong, larger than life personalities and tough guys. The nucleus of the team is filled with driven individuals who will not quit, and in fact welcome distractions, and noise from the media, and controversy and their detractors. In this team it is either sink or swim.

We have the leadership on this team to make Gordon worth the gamble. He will not make this team sink, if he causes a problem the Seahawks would have no problem setting him loose.

 

[UK_Seahawk]

Personally I cant see anything going wrong with a guy who smokes weed moving to state where weed is legal.

Maybe we can get Gordon and Blackmon and hope that the simple maths holds true, 2 negatives make a positive?

 

[drdiags]

I think of Koren Robinson when I think of Josh Gordon. I don't think Gordon has hit rock-bottom yet and nothing in the locker room is going to change him. They have some strong veterans in Cleveland as well, knuckleheads are knuckleheads for a reason.

 

[Ozzy]

Josh Gordon is maybe as talanted as any receiver in the league. He is that good. For the right price I would love to bring him in. I think Lynch was just as much of a gamble when we brought him in and how has that worked out? You're going to hit on some and miss on some but we are where we are because we did take some risks. With Gordon the initial investment wouldn't be as much as it was with Harvin so why not? As long as you don't over pay and make it incentive based I would love seeing Wilson and Gordon together. He is a monster when his head is on right. We have a ton of good leadership in the locker room as well. His issues aren't a lack of effort or dividing teammates ala Harvin either.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

I think this is like trading for Lendale White. I could see Seattle dealing the equivalent of a sixth round pick and then cutting Gordon six weeks later. While obviously not a good trade, it didn't really hurt Seattle much either.

With Seattle virtually a lock to get the max number of compensatory picks this year (four), it makes a lot of sense to take the risk, even if the chance for success is low.

If anyone is looking for that mythical 2007 Randy Moss trade situation, this is it.

This. But I would prefer if we were to take a flyer on this type of player I say we do it with James Blackmon. But if we did go for it I would set up the contract as heavily incentive/performance/behavior laden with some serious out clauses for the Seahawks in any situation.

 

[SeaTown81]

I have absolutely no problem bringing in head case or bad character players on to this team. This is a locker room where you either buy in or you don't.

BUT!!!!!!

There is one position where I do not think it's possible for such a player to work. And that is with big name wide receivers.

You can't be a diva wr and work in the Seahawks offense. This team asks it's wr's to sacrifice a ton. You are expected not only to be cool with not getting a ton of looks and stats. But you're also expected to be cool with blocking being just as important as route running and catching balls.

Brock Huard made an excellent point on the radio after the Harvin trade. There was brief talk about the Hawks trading for Vincent Jackson. And Brock said that he didn't think it was smart to bring in previously established name wr's for the reasons I just mentioned. He said that with a team and an offense like Seattle, you are much better off drafting your wr's and indoctrinating them in to how you do business. With a team that doesn't give it's wr's a ton of looks or stats, you are asking for trouble bringing in a big name, big money guy. I mean, just look at what happened with Harvin. Not only was the dude pulling himself from games. The team felt forced to change it's offensive identity for him. And we all saw how that worked out.

I'm 100% with Brock on wr's for this team. Just look at the guys who have been successful here. Undrafted guys like Doug Baldwin and Jermaine Kearse. Golden Tate was a higher draft choice. But the fact that he was brought up in the Hawks organization made it easier for a guy like him to buy in. And now just look at him in Detroit. He talks about how much he had to sacrifice in Seattle, and how much more he enjoys getting all the looks and stats he does in the Lions offense. If he came up in Detroit, and then was asked to come here. I can almost guarantee you that he would've been a malcontent.

This team, as long as it has the offensive identity that it does, is best to avoid big name diva wide receivers. It's much better off drafting Paul Richardson and Kevin Norwood types, who are 100 times more likely to buy in to what they want out of the position.

 

[sutz]

I have absolutely no problem bringing in head case or bad character players on to this team. This is a locker room where you either buy in or you don't.

BUT!!!!!!

There is one position where I do not think it's possible for such a player to work. And that is with big name wide receivers.

You can't be a diva wr and work in the Seahawks offense. This team asks it's wr's to sacrifice a ton. You are expected not only to be cool with not getting a ton of looks and stats. But you're also expected to be cool with blocking being just as important as route running and catching balls.

Brock Huard made an excellent point on the radio after the Harvin trade. There was brief talk about the Hawks trading for Vincent Jackson. And Brock said that he didn't think it was smart to bring in previously established name wr's for the reasons I just mentioned. He said that with a team and an offense like Seattle, you are much better off drafting your wr's and indoctrinating them in to how you do business. With a team that doesn't give it's wr's a ton of looks or stats, you are asking for trouble bringing in a big name, big money guy. I mean, just look at what happened with Harvin. Not only was the dude pulling himself from games. The team felt forced to change it's offensive identity for him. And we all saw how that worked out.

I'm 100% with Brock on wr's for this team. Just look at the guys who have been successful here. Undrafted guys like Doug Baldwin and Jermaine Kearse. Golden Tate was a higher draft choice. But the fact that he was brought up in the Hawks organization made it easier for a guy like him to buy in. And now just look at him in Detroit. He talks about how much he had to sacrifice in Seattle, and how much more he enjoys getting all the looks and stats he does in the Lions offense. If he came up in Detroit, and then was asked to come here. I can almost guarantee you that he would've been a malcontent.

This team, as long as it has the offensive identity that it does, is best to avoid big name diva wide receivers. It's much better off drafting Paul Richardson and Kevin Norwood types, who are 100 times more likely to buy in to what they want out of the position.

Well said. I agree with you and Brock completely. It's why I think someone like Fitzgerald might work where Harvin and so many others have not, and why Gordon probably wouldn't.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

I have absolutely no problem bringing in head case or bad character players on to this team. This is a locker room where you either buy in or you don't.

BUT!!!!!!

There is one position where I do not think it's possible for such a player to work. And that is with big name wide receivers.

You can't be a diva wr and work in the Seahawks offense. This team asks it's wr's to sacrifice a ton. You are expected not only to be cool with not getting a ton of looks and stats. But you're also expected to be cool with blocking being just as important as route running and catching balls.

Brock Huard made an excellent point on the radio after the Harvin trade. There was brief talk about the Hawks trading for Vincent Jackson. And Brock said that he didn't think it was smart to bring in previously established name wr's for the reasons I just mentioned. He said that with a team and an offense like Seattle, you are much better off drafting your wr's and indoctrinating them in to how you do business. With a team that doesn't give it's wr's a ton of looks or stats, you are asking for trouble bringing in a big name, big money guy. I mean, just look at what happened with Harvin. Not only was the dude pulling himself from games. The team felt forced to change it's offensive identity for him. And we all saw how that worked out.

I'm 100% with Brock on wr's for this team. Just look at the guys who have been successful here. Undrafted guys like Doug Baldwin and Jermaine Kearse. Golden Tate was a higher draft choice. But the fact that he was brought up in the Hawks organization made it easier for a guy like him to buy in. And now just look at him in Detroit. He talks about how much he had to sacrifice in Seattle, and how much more he enjoys getting all the looks and stats he does in the Lions offense. If he came up in Detroit, and then was asked to come here. I can almost guarantee you that he would've been a malcontent.

This team, as long as it has the offensive identity that it does, is best to avoid big name diva wide receivers. It's much better off drafting Paul Richardson and Kevin Norwood types, who are 100 times more likely to buy in to what they want out of the position.

Well said. I agree with you and Brock completely. It's why I think someone like Fitzgerald might work where Harvin and so many others have not, and why Gordon probably wouldn't.

That was the first thought that popped into my head after reading this. Though I do think both Blackmon and Gordon may be young enough to buy in considering the situations they came into the league with. Neither has ever had a chance to play with an actual NFL quarterback so there is that to think about.

 

[brimsalabim]

Yes.. According to Gordon's latest blood test he is indeed too toxic.