What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

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!

NFL personel men concerned about marijuana 'epidemic' (1 Viewer)

Dexter Manley

Footballguy
Interesting article by Don Banks. No specific players are named. I wonder how many player names who have issues with this will be leaked over the next few weeks.

ORLANDO -- There's a widespread belief within the NFL that the 2010 draft represents one of the deepest and most promising pools of collegiate talent in years. But in addition to the vast potential of this year's draft class, numerous NFL personnel evaluators told SI.com they are concerned about the increased number of prospects who have a history of marijuana use in their background, with players often acknowledging a failed drug test for pot in college in interviews with team executives.

SI.com interviewed four NFL head coaches, four general managers and two other high-level club personnel executives for this story. Due to the sensitivity of the topic, all requested anonymity in order to speak candidly about the issue.

According to one veteran club personnel man, 10 or 11 players who carry first-round draft grades on their board this year have been red-flagged for marijuana use in college, an estimate echoed by two clubs' head coaches. Another NFL head coach estimated that "one-third'' of the players on his club's draft board had some sort of history with marijuana use and would thus require an extra level of evaluation as part of the pre-draft scouting process.

"Marijuana use is almost epidemic, with more guys having tested positive for marijuana at some point in their college background than I can ever remember,'' said a longtime team personnel man. "It's almost as if we are having to figure out a new way to evaluate it as part of the character and background report, because it's so prevalent. There're enough instances of it that it's hard to know how to set your board. You can't throw out that many guys. You have to go case-by-case and do your homework on them.''

It's important to note that NFL club officials in this case are only referencing failed drug tests administered by the prospect's college that wind up on his background report, not the drug tests the league conducts as part of the scouting process at last month's NFL Scouting Combine in Indianapolis. Players with drug test failures in college are not automatically enrolled in the NFL's drug-testing program upon being drafted, but those players can be added at the league's discretion, depending on the type of drug used, how recent the failed test occurred and if there were multiple failures.

"It's something that's concerning to all coaches and general managers in this league,'' one veteran NFL head coach said at the league's annual meeting in Orlando. "It has been trending the wrong way in recent years. But it's something that has to be dealt with from on high, at the league level, and not just dealt with on a club by club basis. It's partly a societal issue, but it's something we're having to deal with more and more.''

In many cases these days, club officials say, players are much more open to admitting to past marijuana use or experimentation in college as part of their pre-draft interviews with NFL teams.

"The kids are admitting it much more now, and part of that is what they've been coached to do [by their agents or handlers],'' one club general manager said. "They want to get the truth out and give you an explanation for their use. That's seen as better than letting someone else put it out there for you and making you look like you were being evasive.

"But we've had that same conversation internally on our club: 'Wow, there's a lot of kids this year.' It seems much more common now, across the draft.''

One NFL head coach told me this week that in this era of some states decriminalizing marijuana for medicinal purposes, he has interviewed potential draft picks who didn't even seem to recognize their marijuana smoking constituted drug use in the eyes of the NFL.

"It's pretty significant as a trend,'' the head coach said. "But if you knocked everyone off your board who has experimented with weed, you'd lose about 20 percent of your board, not to mention disqualify a few recent presidents. A third sounds a little high to me, but it's not a rare occurrence to have a player with some pot use in his background. You have to make a judgment on each individual guy.''

That same head coach said that earlier in his NFL coaching career, if a player had failed a drug test for pot in college, his name would be quickly removed from the draft boards of most teams. But times have changed. Clubs are doing more work to try and identify whether a prospect's pot use falls under the experimentation heading, or is done with regularity.

"It's a matter of figuring out which ones smoke, and which ones have to smoke, because they really [are addicted],'' another head coach said. "It's like the drinking issue. You want to know if a guy drinks, or if he has a drinking problem. You're trying to find out and make that distinction with some guys.''

The reaction to a prospect's collegiate marijuana use varies from club to club, team executives and coaches said. The mentality of personnel evaluators and coaches making case-by-case decisions on players with marijuana use in their background has grown more prevalent with the league's infusion of younger coaches and general managers in recent years.

"Overall in the league there's a bit of a different generation of decision-makers and people doing the evaluating,'' one team's general manager said. "Even among those of us who didn't [smoke pot], we had some friends who did and we didn't judge them that harshly. So for some, it's a less damaging red flag for a player to have that on his record. Now, maybe [longtime Colts president] Bill Polian's perception of that is different. Maybe those players are still completely off his board. But it can be generational in that sense, yes. Definitely.''

Even among the club officials who expressed the most concern about the prevalence of prospects in this draft who have failed at least one test for marijuana in college, none said they would automatically remove any such player from their draft board.

"There are probably different shades of red to the red flag you give that player these days, different degrees of how it impacts their grade,'' one head coach said. "I know of one guy who told me he smoked with his mom. It was just something they did together. You have to find out something about the specifics and see if it was a habit, and or if it was experimenting in college. For one thing, it could be a case of colleges testing more, and having better tests. It may not be that use is up, but detection is up.''

Some players suspected of marijuana use in college in recent years, Philadelphia receiver DeSean Jackson and Minnesota receiver-return man Percy Harvin most notably, have been two of the top offensive players in the draft the past two years. Their early success in the NFL has possibly led some teams to take a more lenient approach to drafting talented players who are suspected of collegiate marijuana use, one team front office executive said.

"If you passed on Jackson and you passed on Harvin the past two years, maybe you can't afford to just completely write off that kind of prospect every time, or you won't have a job at some point because you won't win any games,'' one team front office executive said. "But you don't want to take guys and see them be in the [league's drug] program the whole time, because they may never get out of it. You want to determine if it's in their environment and if they're bringing that environment with them [to the NFL]?''

One team's head coach said organizations are doing more and more extensive background checks on draft prospects every year to find out as much information as possible about the practices of their potential employees.

"You have to, because some guys aren't telling you the whole truth about their habits and things that have happened while they're in college,'' the head coach said. "It depends on the team's individual approach, but you can get in trouble if you're just overlooking everything when it comes to that kind of history in their background.''

Another NFL general manager interviewed this week said he has a discussion with his team's owner every time the club is even considering a player who has a red flag on their record for marijuana use in college. And you can't have too many of those talks on a year-in, year-out basis, he said.

"That's a topic of conversation for a lot of GMs with their owners,'' the general manager said. "You have a number of prospects who are quality people, but who might have [screwed] up early on in college. As long as it's not a habitual thing, there's more of a discussion about those players, rather than just jettisoning them off your board. Which is what a lot of teams have done in the past. But I think we're all a little more realistic these days.

"I've gone and scouted players at colleges and their coaches really talk them up, but then they add that 'He has this in his background.' It's definitely something we're going to have to get to the bottom of, but what are you going to do? If the kid has one thing in his past, are you going to throw away a third of your board? That's the reality of the situation we face.''
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writ...ef=twitter_feed
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Once the crystal meth epidemic hits the NFL, then we may have a problem. I don't see marijuana use helping or hurting a player's on field performance.

 
"It's pretty significant as a trend,'' the head coach said. "But if you knocked everyone off your board who has experimented with weed, you'd lose about 20 percent of your board, not to mention disqualify a few recent presidents. A third sounds a little high to me, but it's not a rare occurrence to have a player with some pot use in his background. You have to make a judgment on each individual guy.''
20 percent?HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 
:confused:

Its weed. I would guess at least half of college kids have experimented with it at one time or another. I know investment bankers, doctors, and lawyers who smoke or have smoked in the past. I don't see the big issue here.

 
imo, this is getting way overblown. it's not like pot is performance enhancing. as long as these people continue to perform, it should make no difference. plenty of people in athletics are frequent pot smokers. ricky williams? the entire NBA? if they've smoked in the past, who cares. if they smoke now, who cares. high before the game? who cares!!! if they're getting high during the game on the sidelines... well, that might be an issue. as long as they can continue to perform, then w/e. completely removing some top ranked recruits off of your board because of smoking pot in the past seems pretty ridiculously stupid.

pot is becoming more and more acceptable in society now that all the Reefer Madness fogies are dying off. the baby boomer hippies and those associated with them are now becoming the backbone of society and with that comes acceptance that pot really isn't what the gov't wanted (still would like?) you to think it is. if the talks of california legalizing and taxing it manifest, i could see the rest of the US following suit in the next 10-15 years.

i can see it now... a retired scout who red flagged one of these kids is going to be kicking themselves in the ### because they're watching the kid tear it up at Qualcomm Stadium while in line to buy some headie dank Sour Diesel out of a vending machine... doh. :popcorn:

 
I think the change will come from or in states like Colorado that all ready have passed very liberal medical marijuana laws. If a player has a Doctors perscription for pot and is buying it legally at one of the hundreds of retail outlets in Denver or Boulder and therefore using pot legally, then he would at the minimum have a legal leg to stand on if he were suspended from the NFL. As the NFL would have known he is legally using pot and hired him or drafted him anyway, then potentially suspends him for something that he was doing legally. Maybe that is where this ends up in some sort of court action to determine the extent of Individual rights under the law.

In reality that is what needs to happen in Colorado anyway since the City, State and Federal laws are all in contradicition of each other and the Feds and Police and Prosecuters don't know for sure what to do in most cases where the laws are in defience of each other. But that is another thread altogether. Maybe that is how these issues will resolve themselves by a comprehensive legal review and either Individual, or State rights will prevail or maybe then even more Federal laws to control everything end up being put into place. But they need to clarify the laws, it's only fair to all involved.

 
I'm sure Jamarcus Russell abuses the munchies a little too much in the offseason.

On a serious note, this is an obvious thing. If one thinks of where a lot of these players come from there is complete drug proliferation, and colleges are full of it.

 
If I was a team I would care a little if a player tested for pot on a school administered test due to the fact that said player probably has a greater likelihood of continuing to smoke pot or do other drugs which enhances their chances of getting suspended in the future. However, I would seriously devalue any player who is dumb enough to test for pot on an NFL administered drug test. When a guy knows he's going to get tested and is willing to risk his career to get high than I would have to question that players intelligence and passion for the game.

 
I think the big news that some people are overlooking here is that 10 - 11 prospects with 1st round grades are known to have smoked the hooch cow. And the article seems to imply that most, if not all of these guys admitted to prior use. That seems like an awfully high number compared to years past when it usually seemed like there were only a few guys with 1st round grades who were flagged for this.

I still remember back to the draft years ago when Louis Olliver dropped in the draft due to rumors about him using drugs, and he had to actually go on TV during draft day and deny everything.

Now it seems like more and more players are openly admitting to using in their interviews with NFL teams. And the article says they're being coached to do so (which I'm sure is probably true). This is a pretty stark contrast from how players used to act (they used to deny, deny, deny).

 
I think the big news that some people are overlooking here is that 10 - 11 prospects with 1st round grades are known to have smoked the hooch cow. And the article seems to imply that most, if not all of these guys admitted to prior use. That seems like an awfully high number compared to years past when it usually seemed like there were only a few guys with 1st round grades who were flagged for this.I still remember back to the draft years ago when Louis Olliver dropped in the draft due to rumors about him using drugs, and he had to actually go on TV during draft day and deny everything.Now it seems like more and more players are openly admitting to using in their interviews with NFL teams. And the article says they're being coached to do so (which I'm sure is probably true). This is a pretty stark contrast from how players used to act (they used to deny, deny, deny).
I'm not surprised by the article. The actual number is probably higher than that.
 
I wouldn't worry about the weed thing either but it does show how unmotivated or just dumb a player must be to fail a drug test they know about months in advance.

 
lol'd at the 'epidemic'. I don't personally smoke weed but many of my friends do, 2 of which are very successful men. I don't consider weed a drug. So what, your wide receiver likes to smoke pot in the off-season? I'd look the other way personally.

Edit: Weed is obviously connected to athletes like Pacman, Allen Iverson.. etc. I'm sure most of their mistakes weren't because the influence of Marijuana. You have guys that don't really have 'character issues' that just like to smoke weed once and a while like Ricky Williams. The guy never hurt anybody, stayed out of trouble.. just liked to smoke some weed lol.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If I was a team I would care a little if a player tested for pot on a school administered test due to the fact that said player probably has a greater likelihood of continuing to smoke pot or do other drugs which enhances their chances of getting suspended in the future. However, I would seriously devalue any player who is dumb enough to test for pot on an NFL administered drug test. When a guy knows he's going to get tested and is willing to risk his career to get high than I would have to question that players intelligence and passion for the game.
I think that's part of the bigger issue. I could care less if a player smokes pot at home or at a close-knit party in the off-season, I start to care if he's blatantly doing it in public or during the season.
 
menobrown said:
metoo said:
The NBA wouldnt even have a league if they tested for MJ. No biggie.
NFL wouldn't either.
Tell that to Charles Rogers
Charles smoked pot. But it was the alcohol and cocaine that did him in.
When you get arrested by an officer waking you up in your running car at a traffic light you know you have a drug problem.As long as guys aren't high while they're playing (or driving a car, etc) I could care less who uses it.
 
It's long past time to legalize the stuff and tax it. It's ridiculous that these young men's careers would be threatened by this when the use of marijuana is so widespread in our society. When a law is broken regularly, the wise thing to do is adjust the law because you teach people that the law is not something to respect by maintaining out of date laws. It used to be against the law to use contraception in this country. It used to be against the law to use alcohol. Very recently, in my lifetime, and I never thought this would change, it was against the law to gamble (everywhere except Vegas).

Tax it, which will cut out the drug dealers and organized crime, free up one third of the prisoners (again, reducing the tax burden), and use some of that money for drug treatment and addiction centers.

 
It's long past time to legalize the stuff and tax it. It's ridiculous that these young men's careers would be threatened by this when the use of marijuana is so widespread in our society. When a law is broken regularly, the wise thing to do is adjust the law because you teach people that the law is not something to respect by maintaining out of date laws. It used to be against the law to use contraception in this country. It used to be against the law to use alcohol. Very recently, in my lifetime, and I never thought this would change, it was against the law to gamble (everywhere except Vegas). Tax it, which will cut out the drug dealers and organized crime, free up one third of the prisoners (again, reducing the tax burden), and use some of that money for drug treatment and addiction centers.
Societal norms are indeed forever changing, a point our gb Gekko seems to have overlooked in his lengthy post. In a couple of more years, this may not be an issue at all, except maybe when fans start yelling "Hold on to the ball, ya stoner" at a rookie RB with a fumbling problem.
 
It's long past time to legalize the stuff and tax it. It's ridiculous that these young men's careers would be threatened by this when the use of marijuana is so widespread in our society. When a law is broken regularly, the wise thing to do is adjust the law because you teach people that the law is not something to respect by maintaining out of date laws. It used to be against the law to use contraception in this country. It used to be against the law to use alcohol. Very recently, in my lifetime, and I never thought this would change, it was against the law to gamble (everywhere except Vegas). Tax it, which will cut out the drug dealers and organized crime, free up one third of the prisoners (again, reducing the tax burden), and use some of that money for drug treatment and addiction centers.
Societal norms are indeed forever changing, a point our gb Gekko seems to have overlooked in his lengthy post. In a couple of more years, this may not be an issue at all, except maybe when fans start yelling "Hold on to the ball, ya stoner" at a rookie RB with a fumbling problem.
:thumbup: reefer madness is long gone... change is coming. it's starting in november in the state of california-nia-nia-nia. 50 years ago mr. gekko may have been on the side of majority. now he's the minority. get with the times sir. :clyde:
 
GG, I think you're really missing the point here.

The main thing NFL personnel guys worry about wrt the hippy lettuce isn't public perception. Their biggest concern is how risky their investment in each player is.

The primary thing NFL personnel guys worry about regarding perception, is how their bosses perceive their job performance.

For example, If a GM spends a 1st round pick on a player that everyone knows has used hippy lettuce in the past, then he's got a lot of explaining to do to his boss if that player tests positive and gets suspended.

 
GordonGekko said:
Societal norms are indeed forever changing, a point our gb Gekko seems to have overlooked in his lengthy post. In a couple of more years, this may not be an issue at all, except maybe when fans start yelling "Hold on to the ball, ya stoner" at a rookie RB with a fumbling problem.
What I didn't overlook is that I didn't try to change this into a "Why Weed Should Be Legal In America" debate. Not all of the rest of you can say that. Whether weed should be legal in America and why the NFL is looking at this issue or is concerned or wants the perception of concern are two different ballgames. There is nothing "normal" about the NFL. NFL players are "celebrities", which are held to a different standard in our society than the Average Joe. In a couple of years it might not be an issue, that's possible, BUT IT'S AN ISSUE NOW. How the Average Joe handles using drugs and how a CELEBRITY IN THE PUBLIC EYE handles using drugs and that spins out in the press are two different worlds.
i disagree. the debate on the legalization of marijuana is definitely relevant here and should definitely be something scouts/teams consider when knocking young talented kids off their boards because they have used pot in the past. the fact that there's states considering legalization just goes to show that marijuana is just another plant like tobacco that contains chemicals that can alter the state of consciousness. so can a cup of coffee or a bottle of mountain flippin dew. the reason why pot is illegal is Harry Anslinger had an agenda that was based purely on his personal opinion and not scientific fact. He used "yellow journalism" and propaganda such as reefer madness to instill fear of marijuana and its users into society. at that time the AMA was never given the chance to research the drug. it was pushed to congress and it it was classified as a schedule 1 narcotic with heroin and cocaine. until recently research had never been done. back to the matter at hand...if scouts/gm really care what society thinks then this wouldn't be an issue, given the legalization movement that is occurring. but they really dont. it's that they feel that using pot in the past makes these kids a liability for the organization, which just isn't true. thats what we're debating here or should be debating here. so gg, if you think that these kids are a liability because they've smoked pot, please let us know why...
 
GordonGekko said:
Societal norms are indeed forever changing, a point our gb Gekko seems to have overlooked in his lengthy post. In a couple of more years, this may not be an issue at all, except maybe when fans start yelling "Hold on to the ball, ya stoner" at a rookie RB with a fumbling problem.
What I didn't overlook is that I didn't try to change this into a "Why Weed Should Be Legal In America" debate. Not all of the rest of you can say that. Whether weed should be legal in America and why the NFL is looking at this issue or is concerned or wants the perception of concern are two different ballgames. There is nothing "normal" about the NFL. NFL players are "celebrities", which are held to a different standard in our society than the Average Joe. In a couple of years it might not be an issue, that's possible, BUT IT'S AN ISSUE NOW. How the Average Joe handles using drugs and how a CELEBRITY IN THE PUBLIC EYE handles using drugs and that spins out in the press are two different worlds.
I think the term "societal norms" directly addresses your points, which are all about the public's perceptions of high profile athletes who use marijuana. For more and more of fandom, the only problem with its use by NFL players is the current possibility of the player facing legal or league ramifications. Fewer and fewer have a problem with the usage itself and I believe that that trend will continue.
 
agreed rk. when it's something they've done in the past, not a recurring issue, there should be no issues whatsoever. it's silly that they're taken off of boards completely for something they've done years ago. i could see if they were in legal trouble because of it that teams could see issues, but just experimentation at a young age really doesn't make sense to me.

 
Its not only an epidemic among the prospects, its an epidemic in this country. Its likely to become legal in several states and other on the west coast have clinics or bars people can legally go to. I think the evaluators need to change the script a little bit in wake of what's going on in the world. Why don't they ask them if they've drank beer underage in college while they're at it.

It's funny that there is such a stigma with this drug. My wifes best friends husband has a social anxiety disorder, very nice normal guy, he's a school teacher actually. Goes to the doctor after battling with it for a long period of time as it was causing stress within his family. They prescribe a number of drugs, each with a side effect worse than the other. Tries them for a while but hates the way it makes him feel. He reads on the net that marijuana is sometimes used in cases. Tries it and it works wonders for him.

This guy is as straight laced and normal a guy (wife with 3 girls) as you'll ever meet but I guess he's a bad guy because he smokes pot sometimes.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I blame rap music!
:moneybag: rap has turned the youth into potheads who's only goal in life is to have a blunt in their mouth and jayz blasting on the radio.
So rap music is why the '60's & 70's happened? Funny, I don't recall P-diddy headlining Woodstock.
completely different, the music in the 60' and 70's was good and they smoked joints which don't waste tons of weed like blunts do.Weed was smoked to enjoy back then, now it's an image thing. Back then they smoked weed to get laid, now they smoke weed and kill people while listening to rap.rap + weed = killers70's + weed = fornication
 
I blame rap music!
:goodposting: rap has turned the youth into potheads who's only goal in life is to have a blunt in their mouth and jayz blasting on the radio.
So rap music is why the '60's & 70's happened? Funny, I don't recall P-diddy headlining Woodstock.
completely different, the music in the 60' and 70's was good and they smoked joints which don't waste tons of weed like blunts do.Weed was smoked to enjoy back then, now it's an image thing. Back then they smoked weed to get laid, now they smoke weed and kill people while listening to rap.rap + weed = killers70's + weed = fornication
:lmao: :lmao: :lmao:
 
GordonGekko said:
Societal norms are indeed forever changing, a point our gb Gekko seems to have overlooked in his lengthy post. In a couple of more years, this may not be an issue at all, except maybe when fans start yelling "Hold on to the ball, ya stoner" at a rookie RB with a fumbling problem.
What I didn't overlook is that I didn't try to change this into a "Why Weed Should Be Legal In America" debate. Not all of the rest of you can say that. Whether weed should be legal in America and why the NFL is looking at this issue or is concerned or wants the perception of concern are two different ballgames. There is nothing "normal" about the NFL. NFL players are "celebrities", which are held to a different standard in our society than the Average Joe. In a couple of years it might not be an issue, that's possible, BUT IT'S AN ISSUE NOW. How the Average Joe handles using drugs and how a CELEBRITY IN THE PUBLIC EYE handles using drugs and that spins out in the press are two different worlds.
i disagree. the debate on the legalization of marijuana is definitely relevant here and should definitely be something scouts/teams consider when knocking young talented kids off their boards because they have used pot in the past. the fact that there's states considering legalization just goes to show that marijuana is just another plant like tobacco that contains chemicals that can alter the state of consciousness. so can a cup of coffee or a bottle of mountain flippin dew. the reason why pot is illegal is Harry Anslinger had an agenda that was based purely on his personal opinion and not scientific fact. He used "yellow journalism" and propaganda such as reefer madness to instill fear of marijuana and its users into society. at that time the AMA was never given the chance to research the drug. it was pushed to congress and it it was classified as a schedule 1 narcotic with heroin and cocaine. until recently research had never been done. back to the matter at hand...if scouts/gm really care what society thinks then this wouldn't be an issue, given the legalization movement that is occurring. but they really dont. it's that they feel that using pot in the past makes these kids a liability for the organization, which just isn't true. thats what we're debating here or should be debating here. so gg, if you think that these kids are a liability because they've smoked pot, please let us know why...
Ricky williams
 
Teams are overwhelmingly conservative. They look for reasons to exclude guys. You're less likely to lose your job for passing on warren sapp or desean jackson than you are for drafting a guy you know smokes regularly and goes on to get suspended on a regular basis as well. I dont think recreational drugs should be tested for but they are, so teams need to take that into account. Even if they werent tested for its still something Id be interested in if I were about to make someone a millionaire. Smoking anything is bad for your health and weed is related to a lack of motivation in my personal experience. Sure there are guys out there who are worth the risk but its a lot easier to who with guys who are passionate enough about football that they wouldnt consider doing something which may affect their performance.

 
I think the change will come from or in states like Colorado that all ready have passed very liberal medical marijuana laws. If a player has a Doctors perscription for pot and is buying it legally at one of the hundreds of retail outlets in Denver or Boulder and therefore using pot legally, then he would at the minimum have a legal leg to stand on if he were suspended from the NFL. As the NFL would have known he is legally using pot and hired him or drafted him anyway, then potentially suspends him for something that he was doing legally. Maybe that is where this ends up in some sort of court action to determine the extent of Individual rights under the law. In reality that is what needs to happen in Colorado anyway since the City, State and Federal laws are all in contradicition of each other and the Feds and Police and Prosecuters don't know for sure what to do in most cases where the laws are in defience of each other. But that is another thread altogether. Maybe that is how these issues will resolve themselves by a comprehensive legal review and either Individual, or State rights will prevail or maybe then even more Federal laws to control everything end up being put into place. But they need to clarify the laws, it's only fair to all involved.
Do you think every substance on the nfl banned list is illegal?
 
I blame rap music!
:lol: rap has turned the youth into potheads who's only goal in life is to have a blunt in their mouth and jayz blasting on the radio.
So rap music is why the '60's & 70's happened? Funny, I don't recall P-diddy headlining Woodstock.
completely different, the music in the 60' and 70's was good and they smoked joints which don't waste tons of weed like blunts do.Weed was smoked to enjoy back then, now it's an image thing. Back then they smoked weed to get laid, now they smoke weed and kill people while listening to rap.rap + weed = killers70's + weed = fornication
So if I'm reading between the lines correctly, what you really are saying is that white people on drugs is ok, but black people on drugs is evil. Actually for you it probably isn't even about the weed.
 
I think the change will come from or in states like Colorado that all ready have passed very liberal medical marijuana laws. If a player has a Doctors perscription for pot and is buying it legally at one of the hundreds of retail outlets in Denver or Boulder and therefore using pot legally, then he would at the minimum have a legal leg to stand on if he were suspended from the NFL. As the NFL would have known he is legally using pot and hired him or drafted him anyway, then potentially suspends him for something that he was doing legally. Maybe that is where this ends up in some sort of court action to determine the extent of Individual rights under the law.

In reality that is what needs to happen in Colorado anyway since the City, State and Federal laws are all in contradicition of each other and the Feds and Police and Prosecuters don't know for sure what to do in most cases where the laws are in defience of each other. But that is another thread altogether. Maybe that is how these issues will resolve themselves by a comprehensive legal review and either Individual, or State rights will prevail or maybe then even more Federal laws to control everything end up being put into place. But they need to clarify the laws, it's only fair to all involved.
Do you think every substance on the nfl banned list is illegal?
"It is up to the player to make sure he is compliant to our policy," said Adolpho Birch, the NFL's vice president of law and labor policy. "The view of the league and the union, having been a party to this ... is if you have a banned substance in your body, it is a violation of the policy."As firm as the stance may seem, Birch says the NFL does allow for certain ingredients if an investigation shows that a player has had a medical history that requires a prescription containing a banned substance. It is referred to as a "therapeutic-use" exemption. "If that's the case," Birch said, "it is not a violation."

link

The legal substances that cause positives are not prescribed for a medical condition. Even the diuretic positives are from cutting weight, not from a treatment for a medical condition.

If there is a MMJ patient (who has obtained a valid prescription with an underlying condition which is treated by the MMJ) is suspended, there will be an interesting challenge to the substance abuse policy.

 
I blame rap music!
:shrug: rap has turned the youth into potheads who's only goal in life is to have a blunt in their mouth and jayz blasting on the radio.
So rap music is why the '60's & 70's happened? Funny, I don't recall P-diddy headlining Woodstock.
completely different, the music in the 60' and 70's was good and they smoked joints which don't waste tons of weed like blunts do.Weed was smoked to enjoy back then, now it's an image thing. Back then they smoked weed to get laid, now they smoke weed and kill people while listening to rap.rap + weed = killers70's + weed = fornication
So if I'm reading between the lines correctly, what you really are saying is that white people on drugs is ok, but black people on drugs is evil. Actually for you it probably isn't even about the weed.
:lmao: Whether white, black, brown, or yellow, rap + weed breeds cold blooded killers.
 
I blame rap music!
;) rap has turned the youth into potheads who's only goal in life is to have a blunt in their mouth and jayz blasting on the radio.
So rap music is why the '60's & 70's happened? Funny, I don't recall P-diddy headlining Woodstock.
completely different, the music in the 60' and 70's was good and they smoked joints which don't waste tons of weed like blunts do.Weed was smoked to enjoy back then, now it's an image thing. Back then they smoked weed to get laid, now they smoke weed and kill people while listening to rap.rap + weed = killers70's + weed = fornication
you are joking...right?
 
The NBA wouldnt even have a league if they tested for MJ. No biggie.
:goodposting: :lmao: Shut it down with that one. Not to be racist but the league is comprised of young black men who's culture (personal exp. in HS, college, A/AA ball) dont really frown on Marijuana. Thats just from my own personal relationships. Being white I dont find weed a big deal or at least I find it more accepted than even high alcohol use.Guess what Im getting at is that im not surprised nor do I think its new to anyone evaluating these young men. :confused:
 
money.never.sleeps said:
Shut it down with that one. Not to be racist but the league is comprised of young black men who's culture (personal exp. in HS, college, A/AA ball) dont really frown on Marijuana. Thats just from my own personal relationships. Being white I dont find weed a big deal or at least I find it more accepted than even high alcohol use.
:confused: Why does race matter with regard to a person's view on drugs?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top