Can someone connect the dots for me? I fail to see what they're insinuating here..
"Josh Gordon’s absence from the Cleveland Browns may have nothing to do with his battles with substance abuse or addiction", and it's actually because he got his child support ruling?
Why would he leave the Browns and $1,900 per week after learning he owes $6k+ per month in child support? I'm not following the logic here.
I think the implication is that the ruling was an additional stress in his life that may have caused him to seek further counseling to avoid relapse