This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Maybe you have missed the last couple of years where Roger Goodell is making DAMN sure this isn't the freaking N B A.
...and god love him for it. I have to say that Goodell is doing an exception job as commish.
He obviously has been caught multiple times. I guarantee you if a guy got caught doing roids multiple times, he would be suspended for a year as well.
That sweet sweet booger sugar.erumor has it that it resembled flour.
Doesn't seem like he's doing a very good job then. Every year there seems to be more stories of NFL players breaking the law compared to NBA players.
The suspension isn't based on what you do wrong, but how many times. He has multiple drug tests and also has had other off the field issues.
1rst-free pass2nd-play times over3rd- you deff have a major malfunction
Considering that there are 53 men on an NFL football team and (I think) 12 on an NBA team, my guess is that the % still goes in favor of the NBA employing more thugs than the NFL. However, it really is just a matter of semantics - idiots that have far more $ than intelligence. Off my soap box......
It should be noted that he gets a much better deal than I would if I failed a drug test at work.
You get drug tested at work? How is that legal?
Pretty common in a large handful of industries. Were you joking
How do you know it wasn't pot he did?
??I don't think I've ever had a job where I wasn't drug tested upon initiation of employment. Pretty common stuff, pee in a cup and donate some hair.Pretty common in a large handful of industries. Were you joking
Let's see 32 - 53 player rosters and 30 - 12 player rosters. You do the math.
Wow. America sucks. Land of the free???I don't think I've ever had a job where I wasn't drug tested upon initiation of employment. Pretty common stuff, pee in a cup and donate some hair.Pretty common in a large handful of industries. Were you joking
Freedom <> AnarchyWe do have laws here. Sorry if that's an inconvenience.
You're free to choose your line of work, employers are free to choose to test their employees for drugs. If you don't like the terms of employment then don't work there. I don't see anything unamerican in that.
Sorry if I hit a nerve, just strikes me as weird employers would impose drug testing as a condition of employment. Based on the replies it seems there is no real choice for employees unless they choose to work in a different industry. That doesn't seem like a good fit for an economy, organizations or individuals in my opinion. I don't do drugs and I'm not American, just surprised.If that is the culture then the Jackson suspension makes a lot more sense, it seems in line to discipline him as an employee for something completely unrelated to his performance which will only harm his team, himself and the league as a whole.
Nope, didn't hit a nerve. One could argue that drugs do affect perfomance but even if they don't drugs can have a negative affect on public relations. Football is entertainment and if you get the reputation as being a league of drug addicts, criminals, thugs, etc. you are going to turn off fans and even worse advertisers. This can certainly lead to harm to the team and league.The bottom line is that playing football in the NFL is a privilege. It is prestigous and you can make a lot of money doing it. If you want to be part of the league you have to follow its rules and part of that is drug testing.
But we only know because they told us. I can understand suspensions for arrests but why are they actively seeking this stuff out. Meanwhile PEDs get a lighter treatment.
They have the drug policies to satisfy congress and the public they are taking active measures to keep their league clean.
Unless PEDs are the issue here, Mr. Goodell doesn't have to suspend Jackson on my account.
There's close to 60 players on an NFL roster, and only 14 on an NBA roster.
What public? That is equivalent to a Arista Records drug testing their artists. I think that PEDs should be the only thing they are concerned about b/c it compromises the integrity of the game. I think it's insane that doctors and lawyers (who have other people's livelihood in their hands) don't get tested but atheletes do.
If Arista Records thought that their sales were being hurt because their artists were perceived as drug addicts then maybe they would test them. Then again Arista Records doesn't have advertisers and antitrust exemptions to worry about either.The NFL cares deeply about PR and image. You may not agree with it but they feel that having a drug testing policy helps that image.
The case is pending. Unless Edwards can prove that he wasn't drunk I can guarantee you that he'll be suspended.
So you think people are refusing to patronize the NFL b/c of its image. My point is neither industry's sales are hurt by stuff like this. If anything it adds to the storyline.
Pretty sure the NFL still has a higher ratio and NFL players seem to get into bigger trouble compared to NBA players.
DUI / Alcohol related incidents fall under the substance abuse program, negotiated in the CBA. If he isn't in the program, he'll get no suspension, but enter the program. Doesn't make much sense to me... seems more like a personal conduct policy issue than substance abuse, but that's the way it falls in the NFL at this time.The_U said:
Yes I do. I have a buddy on my softball team that is a cop and has season tickets to the Penguins. He offered to take me to a Penguins game and so I offered to take him to a Steelers game. He turned me down saying he doesn't watch the NFL anymore because it is a league of thugs and drug addicts.Another guy I play softball with owns a BBQ place and he markets his sauces via an agreement with Ben Roethlisberger. One of his biggest moneymakers was selling Big Ben products through school fundraisers. Obviously sales were pretty bleak last spring.
Well if this is the case then it is stupid. Edwards should face more punishment from the team and/or league than just not getting the start in a game.ETA: I wonder how the Steelers got away with suspending Santonio Holmes for a game a couple of years ago when he was arrested for smoking pot.DUI / Alcohol related incidents fall under the substance abuse program, negotiated in the CBA. If he isn't in the program, he'll get no suspension, but enter the program. Doesn't make much sense to me... seems more like a personal conduct policy issue than substance abuse, but that's the way it falls in the NFL at this time.
Tenard was busted at least a month ago...and was just suspended two days ago. There are some rumors he was busted in the spring even.It takes a while to get thru the red tape.
Edwards doesn't have to prove anything. The prosecution has to prove he was drunk.
True. But I am guessing the results of the breath-analyser test that showed Edwards had two times the permissible level of alcohol in his system and the fact that Edwards had admitted that he had been drinking is going to make the prosecution's case pretty easy.
