Would Lawrence Taylor's Career Have Been Cut Short Today? (1 Viewer)

[cstu]

LT has admitted that he was doing cocaine as early as his second year in the NFL. In 1996 he had entered a rehab program (for one week). There was no suspension at this point and the test he failed in May 1995 wasn't made public. He said in his book he was smoking crack three times a week from 1982 to 1985.

He was finally suspended 4 games in 1988 after his 2nd failed test for cocaine. Then in 1989 he was found passed out drunk behind the wheel of his car.

With the NFL drug policy today, would LT have survived getting tested 10 times a month?

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

No

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I guess not.

On the other hand maybe it would have kept him clean and he would have had an even longer and better career. Yes there were games where he must have been batsht crazy, but more likely there were more games where he was just out of it.

 

[mr roboto]

Yes, his career would be cut short. In part due to stronger policy, in part due to increased coverage with social media and increased public surveillance due to smart phones, cameras, video etc.

 

[cstu]

Yes, his career would be cut short. In part due to stronger policy, in part due to increased coverage with social media and increased public surveillance due to smart phones, cameras, video etc.

Once he failed the first test in 1985 it would have been difficult for him not to go down the road Gordon and Blackmon are. He would have been tested more frequently than he was back then and wouldn't have known when tests would be given so he could figure out a way to pass.

After 1985 I think he would have tested positive again and been suspended 4 games in 1986. Probably would have missed 1987 with another failed test.

 

[Khy]

I'd have to assume (as others noted above) that he would have faced a growing number of suspensions due to positive drug tests and thus would have eventually been banned from the league. Which really makes you think about things that are happening now. In the vein of... if a drug isn't a PED then why does the NFL care that much?

Yes... I understand they're illegal drugs. But at the same time, if anything they would hinder your on field performance. If you can post 10 receptions for 261 yards and 2 TDs while taking in a copious amount of pot during the week. Why should the NFL care? Hell... if anything that should make it 'harder' to play the game. Like, I understand the NFLs stance on illegal drugs and all. I just don't feel like it's much of their business what players are doing to their own bodies. The NFL isn't the DEA. In my opinion, they should check for PEDs and that's it. If Josh Gordon wants to smoke a little pot or Justin Blackmon wants to get blackout drunk in their downtime who are we to tell them it's wrong? I'd say probably about 80% of American adults do one or the other if not both.

But again, to answer the question. Yes, LT probably would've been banned long before he had a chance to make the impact he did on this league.

Just for a theory experiment... assume that guys like Montana, LT, Jerry Rice, Barry Sanders, Jim Brown etc. were all doing the type of drugs that LT was in his prime while performing to the levels they did. And assume the league had it's current drug policies in place during their time in the league. All of them would have likely been suspended and forced out of the league years before they became household names and honestly, the NFL never becomes the juggernaut it is in this day and age.

Josh Gordon is the type of electric player who can literally save the city of Cleveland and give them hope for sports. He's probably the biggest hope Cleveland has had since Lebron was drafted. But he likes to get high a little and that will destroy his chances of ever having a chance at the clear HoF potential career he has in front of him. And I personally think it's ridiculous.

 

[Insein]

I think the drugs would certainly be an issue but also his style would be costing him $25k a week in todays NFL.

 

[Soulfly3]

LT is evidence of why players should be allowed to smash rails of blow

 

[cloppbeast]

When LT played, the NFL hadn't yet reached its currently insane level of self-righteousness.

 

[mquinnjr]

I'd have to assume (as others noted above) that he would have faced a growing number of suspensions due to positive drug tests and thus would have eventually been banned from the league. Which really makes you think about things that are happening now. In the vein of... if a drug isn't a PED then why does the NFL care that much?

Yes... I understand they're illegal drugs. But at the same time, if anything they would hinder your on field performance. If you can post 10 receptions for 261 yards and 2 TDs while taking in a copious amount of pot during the week. Why should the NFL care? Hell... if anything that should make it 'harder' to play the game. Like, I understand the NFLs stance on illegal drugs and all. I just don't feel like it's much of their business what players are doing to their own bodies. The NFL isn't the DEA. In my opinion, they should check for PEDs and that's it. If Josh Gordon wants to smoke a little pot or Justin Blackmon wants to get blackout drunk in their downtime who are we to tell them it's wrong? I'd say probably about 80% of American adults do one or the other if not both.

But again, to answer the question. Yes, LT probably would've been banned long before he had a chance to make the impact he did on this league.

Just for a theory experiment... assume that guys like Montana, LT, Jerry Rice, Barry Sanders, Jim Brown etc. were all doing the type of drugs that LT was in his prime while performing to the levels they did. And assume the league had it's current drug policies in place during their time in the league. All of them would have likely been suspended and forced out of the league years before they became household names and honestly, the NFL never becomes the juggernaut it is in this day and age.

Josh Gordon is the type of electric player who can literally save the city of Cleveland and give them hope for sports. He's probably the biggest hope Cleveland has had since Lebron was drafted. But he likes to get high a little and that will destroy his chances of ever having a chance at the clear HoF potential career he has in front of him. And I personally think it's ridiculous.

Well said.

 

[Brewtown]

When LT played, the NFL hadn't yet reached its currently insane level of self-righteousness.

This is very true.

 

[Khy]

LT is evidence of why players should be allowed to smash rails of blow

I read this entire line in Carl's voice and finished it with "Carl's Stone Cold Lock of the Century! Of the Week!"

 

[Insein]

LT is evidence of why players should be allowed to smash rails of blow

I read this entire line in Carl's voice and finished it with "Carl's Stone Cold Lock of the Century! Of the Week!"

I read every post by soulfly as Carl. It usually fits.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I'd have to assume (as others noted above) that he would have faced a growing number of suspensions due to positive drug tests and thus would have eventually been banned from the league. Which really makes you think about things that are happening now. In the vein of... if a drug isn't a PED then why does the NFL care that much?

Yes... I understand they're illegal drugs. But at the same time, if anything they would hinder your on field performance. If you can post 10 receptions for 261 yards and 2 TDs while taking in a copious amount of pot during the week. Why should the NFL care? Hell... if anything that should make it 'harder' to play the game. Like, I understand the NFLs stance on illegal drugs and all. I just don't feel like it's much of their business what players are doing to their own bodies. The NFL isn't the DEA. In my opinion, they should check for PEDs and that's it. If Josh Gordon wants to smoke a little pot or Justin Blackmon wants to get blackout drunk in their downtime who are we to tell them it's wrong? I'd say probably about 80% of American adults do one or the other if not both.

But again, to answer the question. Yes, LT probably would've been banned long before he had a chance to make the impact he did on this league.

Just for a theory experiment... assume that guys like Montana, LT, Jerry Rice, Barry Sanders, Jim Brown etc. were all doing the type of drugs that LT was in his prime while performing to the levels they did. And assume the league had it's current drug policies in place during their time in the league. All of them would have likely been suspended and forced out of the league years before they became household names and honestly, the NFL never becomes the juggernaut it is in this day and age.

Josh Gordon is the type of electric player who can literally save the city of Cleveland and give them hope for sports. He's probably the biggest hope Cleveland has had since Lebron was drafted. But he likes to get high a little and that will destroy his chances of ever having a chance at the clear HoF potential career he has in front of him. And I personally think it's ridiculous.

Well said.

Just for the sake of evenness, people don't know the players who have been helped by these policies.

A lot of players (I bet it is a lot) have made different choices than Gordon and Blackmon, faced with the choice of cleaning up, fixing things, and working for a better career or losing it all, some to many have likely chosen the former.

And as a league the quality is probably better overall without players drunk or high.

 

[Khy]

I'd have to assume (as others noted above) that he would have faced a growing number of suspensions due to positive drug tests and thus would have eventually been banned from the league. Which really makes you think about things that are happening now. In the vein of... if a drug isn't a PED then why does the NFL care that much?

Yes... I understand they're illegal drugs. But at the same time, if anything they would hinder your on field performance. If you can post 10 receptions for 261 yards and 2 TDs while taking in a copious amount of pot during the week. Why should the NFL care? Hell... if anything that should make it 'harder' to play the game. Like, I understand the NFLs stance on illegal drugs and all. I just don't feel like it's much of their business what players are doing to their own bodies. The NFL isn't the DEA. In my opinion, they should check for PEDs and that's it. If Josh Gordon wants to smoke a little pot or Justin Blackmon wants to get blackout drunk in their downtime who are we to tell them it's wrong? I'd say probably about 80% of American adults do one or the other if not both.

But again, to answer the question. Yes, LT probably would've been banned long before he had a chance to make the impact he did on this league.

Just for a theory experiment... assume that guys like Montana, LT, Jerry Rice, Barry Sanders, Jim Brown etc. were all doing the type of drugs that LT was in his prime while performing to the levels they did. And assume the league had it's current drug policies in place during their time in the league. All of them would have likely been suspended and forced out of the league years before they became household names and honestly, the NFL never becomes the juggernaut it is in this day and age.

Josh Gordon is the type of electric player who can literally save the city of Cleveland and give them hope for sports. He's probably the biggest hope Cleveland has had since Lebron was drafted. But he likes to get high a little and that will destroy his chances of ever having a chance at the clear HoF potential career he has in front of him. And I personally think it's ridiculous.

Well said.

Just for the sake of evenness, people don't know the players who have been helped by these policies.

A lot of players (I bet it is a lot) have made different choices than Gordon and Blackmon, faced with the choice of cleaning up, fixing things, and working for a better career or losing it all, some to many have likely chosen the former.

And as a league the quality is probably better overall without players drunk or high.

I disagree by a massive margin. I really can't see how the quality of the league is better or worse whether these rules are in place or not. So long as you don't have Justin Blackmon blowing a .25 during kickoff, I could care less what he does in his free time. Same goes for Gordon, I really don't care unless he's laying on the sideline with a bag of Doritos in his hand instead of playing football.

What these players do in their own free time shouldn't be ours nor the NFLs problem.

Sure, are there players that take it to huge extremes like crack and meth and stuff like that? Yeah. But if you think there's that many crack and meth addicts that are in the NFL I think you're kidding yourself a little bit. Past crack, meth, heroin almost no drug is going to harm a players performance if taken recreationally during the week. So long as they're not having issues performing on gameday it makes my experience no different.

The fact that Josh Gordon might be facing a full season suspension for testing positive to pot... friggin pot. Give me a break. I'm sorry it's just ridiculous and I'm tired of Goodell essentially (at least in my opinion) destroying this league. At the rate he's going soon football will be golf.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I really can't see how the quality of the league is better or worse whether these rules are in place or not. So long as you don't have Justin Blackmon blowing a .25 during kickoff, I could care less what he does in his free time. Same goes for Gordon, I really don't care unless he's laying on the sideline with a bag of Doritos in his hand instead of playing football.

I think this is the problem. The league based on past experience doesn't want this happening. If Josh hits a party on the weekend and shows up for work and puts up 12/240/3, then they're thrilled, who cares.

What they don't want are players one day showing up 10 minutes late, play at 50%, and facing a disastrous life that they are only enabling. See LT and probably quite a few others for that.

 

[Khy]

I really can't see how the quality of the league is better or worse whether these rules are in place or not. So long as you don't have Justin Blackmon blowing a .25 during kickoff, I could care less what he does in his free time. Same goes for Gordon, I really don't care unless he's laying on the sideline with a bag of Doritos in his hand instead of playing football.

I think this is the problem. The league based on past experience doesn't want this happening. If Josh hits a party on the weekend and shows up for work and puts up 12/240/3, then they're thrilled, who cares.

What they don't want are players one day showing up 10 minutes late, play at 50%, and facing a disastrous life that they are only enabling. See LT and probably quite a few others for that.

Yeah, but my opinion would be THAT's when the drug tests should come into play. If Josh Gordon shows up Sunday for game time and he can barely stand up, then that's when suspensions could come into play. But if it's a Wednesday night and he wants to have a bowl or go get drunk, why does it matter? This is the NFL these people are grown a$$ adults, this isn't college anymore. There shouldn't be curfews and Momma Goodell putting you in timeout every time you dip into the cookie jar.

 

[cstu]

Just for a theory experiment... assume that guys like Montana, LT, Jerry Rice, Barry Sanders, Jim Brown etc. were all doing the type of drugs that LT was in his prime while performing to the levels they did. And assume the league had it's current drug policies in place during their time in the league. All of them would have likely been suspended and forced out of the league years before they became household names and honestly, the NFL never becomes the juggernaut it is in this day and age.

Exactly why I posted this thread. Destroying the careers of Gordon and Blackmon over weed and alcohol is terrible for the league. I shudder to imagine how many great players the NFL would have lost if this policy were in place in the 70's and 80's.

 

[Amused to Death]

Just for a theory experiment... assume that guys like Montana, LT, Jerry Rice, Barry Sanders, Jim Brown etc. were all doing the type of drugs that LT was in his prime while performing to the levels they did. And assume the league had it's current drug policies in place during their time in the league. All of them would have likely been suspended and forced out of the league years before they became household names and honestly, the NFL never becomes the juggernaut it is in this day and age.

Exactly why I posted this thread. Destroying the careers of Gordon and Blackmon over weed and alcohol is terrible for the league. I shudder to imagine how many great players the NFL would have lost if this policy were in place in the 70's and 80's.

I agree about alcohol and weed, but coke and crack are different. When you're found passed out behind the wheel of your car like Taylor was you need a wake up call much like what Ryan did for Cris Carter.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

LT is evidence of why players should be allowed to smash rails of blow

Unless you are already in the substance abuse program, you can smash rails of blow as much as you want, as long as you stop prior to your once a year pee test every Spring. The guys who get suspended are the ones who have a serious problem, as they continue to use despite knowing full well that they are under the microscope and facing an increasing number of random screens. A true recreational user without a drug issue is pretty much certain not to get caught, and certainly won't ever face suspension if they lay off after a first positive test.

 

[Khy]

Just for a theory experiment... assume that guys like Montana, LT, Jerry Rice, Barry Sanders, Jim Brown etc. were all doing the type of drugs that LT was in his prime while performing to the levels they did. And assume the league had it's current drug policies in place during their time in the league. All of them would have likely been suspended and forced out of the league years before they became household names and honestly, the NFL never becomes the juggernaut it is in this day and age.

Exactly why I posted this thread. Destroying the careers of Gordon and Blackmon over weed and alcohol is terrible for the league. I shudder to imagine how many great players the NFL would have lost if this policy were in place in the 70's and 80's.

I agree about alcohol and weed, but coke and crack are different. When you're found passed out behind the wheel of your car like Taylor was you need a wake up call much like what Ryan did for Cris Carter.

Sure, but here we're litterally talking weed (Gordon) and alcohol (Blackmon) getting these guys suspended indefinitely. Do they need help? I think Blackmon does, the kid is clearly an alcoholic. But Gordon doesn't, millions of people smoke pot at least once a day and function perfectly in their lives. Should either of them be suspended indefinitely for this though? Absolutely not. Unless they're showing up to work (game day/practice/team meetings etc) blasted out of their skulls. I don't see why it's the NFLs problem.

 

[KellysHeroes]

LT would be lucky to have lasted 5 yrs in todays NFL

 

[massraider]

I'd have to assume (as others noted above) that he would have faced a growing number of suspensions due to positive drug tests and thus would have eventually been banned from the league. Which really makes you think about things that are happening now. In the vein of... if a drug isn't a PED then why does the NFL care that much?

Yes... I understand they're illegal drugs. But at the same time, if anything they would hinder your on field performance. If you can post 10 receptions for 261 yards and 2 TDs while taking in a copious amount of pot during the week. Why should the NFL care? Hell... if anything that should make it 'harder' to play the game. Like, I understand the NFLs stance on illegal drugs and all. I just don't feel like it's much of their business what players are doing to their own bodies. The NFL isn't the DEA. In my opinion, they should check for PEDs and that's it. If Josh Gordon wants to smoke a little pot or Justin Blackmon wants to get blackout drunk in their downtime who are we to tell them it's wrong? I'd say probably about 80% of American adults do one or the other if not both.

But again, to answer the question. Yes, LT probably would've been banned long before he had a chance to make the impact he did on this league.

Just for a theory experiment... assume that guys like Montana, LT, Jerry Rice, Barry Sanders, Jim Brown etc. were all doing the type of drugs that LT was in his prime while performing to the levels they did. And assume the league had it's current drug policies in place during their time in the league. All of them would have likely been suspended and forced out of the league years before they became household names and honestly, the NFL never becomes the juggernaut it is in this day and age.

Josh Gordon is the type of electric player who can literally save the city of Cleveland and give them hope for sports. He's probably the biggest hope Cleveland has had since Lebron was drafted. But he likes to get high a little and that will destroy his chances of ever having a chance at the clear HoF potential career he has in front of him. And I personally think it's ridiculous.

Well said.

Yes, very well said. Assuming that none of those players altered their choices because there were penalties involved (frankly, an absurd assumption), and assume that no players stepped up in their place (madness), and that losing a few superstars kept the NFL from it's long, steady rise as the most dominant sports league in the USA. By the way, Josh Gordon can't save himself, figuratively or literally, let alone a city, and frankly it's an insult to Cleveland.

Very well said, indeed.

Perhaps if LT had gotten a 4 game suspension back in the day, he may have gotten help. Maybe he would have saved some money, or had a better career.

The NFL isn't a God-given right. They can run their league any way they see fit, and if they don't want to employ alcoholics that endanger others, and users of illegal drugs, they don't have to.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

So let me get this straight...

Quite a few of you think it is GOOD thing that the NFL didn't really attempt to prevent cocaine use in the old days?

Further they don't really consider the POSSIBILITY that a failed drug test in those days might have actually encouraged some folks to get help and improve their personal lives (and in the process, very likely their overall career performances)?

Further, they don't seem to realize that cocaine IS a rather blatant performance enhancing drug? Seriously? It is a MASSIVE stimulant. Long term damage, you bet. Game day edge, uhhhh, yeah - at least for a while.

I get the #####ing about putting weed in the same category as some of the other drugs. But the extent some folks would like to dictate a total lack of rgard for ANY personal matters to a PRIVATE organization of for-profit teams is mind-boggling to me. Perhaps there is some cocaine involved. It does sometimes lead to hallucinations and paranoia.

 

[NCCommish]

So let me get this straight...

Quite a few of you think it is GOOD thing that the NFL didn't really attempt to prevent cocaine use in the old days?

Further they don't really consider the POSSIBILITY that a failed drug test in those days might have actually encouraged some folks to get help and improve their personal lives (and in the process, very likely their overall career performances)?

Further, they don't seem to realize that cocaine IS a rather blatant performance enhancing drug? Seriously? It is a MASSIVE stimulant. Long term damage, you bet. Game day edge, uhhhh, yeah - at least for a while.

I get the #####ing about putting weed in the same category as some of the other drugs. But the extent some folks would like to dictate a total lack of rgard for ANY personal matters to a PRIVATE organization of for-profit teams is mind-boggling to me. Perhaps there is some cocaine involved. It does sometimes lead to hallucinations and paranoia.

The NFL is a non-profit. It's was part of a special tax break written in 1966.

The National Football League takes in more than $9.5 billion per year and is exempt from Federal taxes. As a nonprofit, it earns more than the Y, the Red Cross, Goodwill, the Salvation Army or Catholic Charities – yet it stands as one of the greatest profit-generating commercial advertising, entertainment and media enterprises ever created.

For the love of Richard Sherman, how can this be?

An arcane tax code change that eased the 1966 merger of the NFL with the old American Football League landed the new combined entity in section 501©6 of the tax code, designated as an industry association. The designation actually covers “chambers of commerce, real estate boards, boards of trade, and professional football leagues.”

The teams aren't non-profit but the league is. This means the league made about 10 billion tax free dollars in 2013. Just an FYI.

 

[tone1oc]

So let me get this straight...

Quite a few of you think it is GOOD thing that the NFL didn't really attempt to prevent cocaine use in the old days?

Further they don't really consider the POSSIBILITY that a failed drug test in those days might have actually encouraged some folks to get help and improve their personal lives (and in the process, very likely their overall career performances)?

Further, they don't seem to realize that cocaine IS a rather blatant performance enhancing drug? Seriously? It is a MASSIVE stimulant. Long term damage, you bet. Game day edge, uhhhh, yeah - at least for a while.

I get the #####ing about putting weed in the same category as some of the other drugs. But the extent some folks would like to dictate a total lack of rgard for ANY personal matters to a PRIVATE organization of for-profit teams is mind-boggling to me. Perhaps there is some cocaine involved. It does sometimes lead to hallucinations and paranoia.

Do you really think the NFL's drug policy is helping anyone other than the NFL and their corporate brand identity? Give me a break. If LT was suspended/banned from the NFL we would of never witnessed an all time great do his thing and his life would of been significantly worse. A lose/lose.

I think its hilarious your handle/avatar is taken from Chris Farley. A man that loved his cocaine to death quite literally.

 

[Khy]

So let me get this straight...

Quite a few of you think it is GOOD thing that the NFL didn't really attempt to prevent cocaine use in the old days?

Further they don't really consider the POSSIBILITY that a failed drug test in those days might have actually encouraged some folks to get help and improve their personal lives (and in the process, very likely their overall career performances)?

Further, they don't seem to realize that cocaine IS a rather blatant performance enhancing drug? Seriously? It is a MASSIVE stimulant. Long term damage, you bet. Game day edge, uhhhh, yeah - at least for a while.

I get the #####ing about putting weed in the same category as some of the other drugs. But the extent some folks would like to dictate a total lack of rgard for ANY personal matters to a PRIVATE organization of for-profit teams is mind-boggling to me. Perhaps there is some cocaine involved. It does sometimes lead to hallucinations and paranoia.

Okay, all this post told me is that you know literally nothing about the effects of drugs on the human body.

First thing: Cocaine would not give you a game day edge. Speaking from experience. You would be way to distracted on useless stuff and way to jittery to play football.

Second thing: Cocaine clean didn't cause hallucinations nor paranoia really. If anything it kind of makes you a little more care free.

The only way coke would be a PED is if you were up all night drinking and doing more coke and were falling asleep on the sidelines.

 

[cstu]

I'd have to assume (as others noted above) that he would have faced a growing number of suspensions due to positive drug tests and thus would have eventually been banned from the league. Which really makes you think about things that are happening now. In the vein of... if a drug isn't a PED then why does the NFL care that much?

Yes... I understand they're illegal drugs. But at the same time, if anything they would hinder your on field performance. If you can post 10 receptions for 261 yards and 2 TDs while taking in a copious amount of pot during the week. Why should the NFL care? Hell... if anything that should make it 'harder' to play the game. Like, I understand the NFLs stance on illegal drugs and all. I just don't feel like it's much of their business what players are doing to their own bodies. The NFL isn't the DEA. In my opinion, they should check for PEDs and that's it. If Josh Gordon wants to smoke a little pot or Justin Blackmon wants to get blackout drunk in their downtime who are we to tell them it's wrong? I'd say probably about 80% of American adults do one or the other if not both.

But again, to answer the question. Yes, LT probably would've been banned long before he had a chance to make the impact he did on this league.

Just for a theory experiment... assume that guys like Montana, LT, Jerry Rice, Barry Sanders, Jim Brown etc. were all doing the type of drugs that LT was in his prime while performing to the levels they did. And assume the league had it's current drug policies in place during their time in the league. All of them would have likely been suspended and forced out of the league years before they became household names and honestly, the NFL never becomes the juggernaut it is in this day and age.

Josh Gordon is the type of electric player who can literally save the city of Cleveland and give them hope for sports. He's probably the biggest hope Cleveland has had since Lebron was drafted. But he likes to get high a little and that will destroy his chances of ever having a chance at the clear HoF potential career he has in front of him. And I personally think it's ridiculous.

Well said.

Yes, very well said. Assuming that none of those players altered their choices because there were penalties involved (frankly, an absurd assumption), and assume that no players stepped up in their place (madness), and that losing a few superstars kept the NFL from it's long, steady rise as the most dominant sports league in the USA. By the way, Josh Gordon can't save himself, figuratively or literally, let alone a city, and frankly it's an insult to Cleveland.

Very well said, indeed.

Perhaps if LT had gotten a 4 game suspension back in the day, he may have gotten help. Maybe he would have saved some money, or had a better career.

The NFL isn't a God-given right. They can run their league any way they see fit, and if they don't want to employ alcoholics that endanger others, and users of illegal drugs, they don't have to.

Blackmon could have his career ended because he's not allowed to fall off the wagon once in his recovery from alcoholism. To me that isn't fair. If he's a constant drunk it's one thing but the current rules are draconian.

 

[NCCommish]

I'd have to assume (as others noted above) that he would have faced a growing number of suspensions due to positive drug tests and thus would have eventually been banned from the league. Which really makes you think about things that are happening now. In the vein of... if a drug isn't a PED then why does the NFL care that much?

Yes... I understand they're illegal drugs. But at the same time, if anything they would hinder your on field performance. If you can post 10 receptions for 261 yards and 2 TDs while taking in a copious amount of pot during the week. Why should the NFL care? Hell... if anything that should make it 'harder' to play the game. Like, I understand the NFLs stance on illegal drugs and all. I just don't feel like it's much of their business what players are doing to their own bodies. The NFL isn't the DEA. In my opinion, they should check for PEDs and that's it. If Josh Gordon wants to smoke a little pot or Justin Blackmon wants to get blackout drunk in their downtime who are we to tell them it's wrong? I'd say probably about 80% of American adults do one or the other if not both.

But again, to answer the question. Yes, LT probably would've been banned long before he had a chance to make the impact he did on this league.

Just for a theory experiment... assume that guys like Montana, LT, Jerry Rice, Barry Sanders, Jim Brown etc. were all doing the type of drugs that LT was in his prime while performing to the levels they did. And assume the league had it's current drug policies in place during their time in the league. All of them would have likely been suspended and forced out of the league years before they became household names and honestly, the NFL never becomes the juggernaut it is in this day and age.

Josh Gordon is the type of electric player who can literally save the city of Cleveland and give them hope for sports. He's probably the biggest hope Cleveland has had since Lebron was drafted. But he likes to get high a little and that will destroy his chances of ever having a chance at the clear HoF potential career he has in front of him. And I personally think it's ridiculous.

Well said.

Yes, very well said. Assuming that none of those players altered their choices because there were penalties involved (frankly, an absurd assumption), and assume that no players stepped up in their place (madness), and that losing a few superstars kept the NFL from it's long, steady rise as the most dominant sports league in the USA. By the way, Josh Gordon can't save himself, figuratively or literally, let alone a city, and frankly it's an insult to Cleveland.

Very well said, indeed.

Perhaps if LT had gotten a 4 game suspension back in the day, he may have gotten help. Maybe he would have saved some money, or had a better career.

The NFL isn't a God-given right. They can run their league any way they see fit, and if they don't want to employ alcoholics that endanger others, and users of illegal drugs, they don't have to.

Blackmon could have his career ended because he's not allowed to fall off the wagon once in his recovery from alcoholism. To me that isn't fair. If he's a constant drunk it's one thing but the current rules are draconian.

He was in stage 3. He has had a chance or two.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

So let me get this straight...

Quite a few of you think it is GOOD thing that the NFL didn't really attempt to prevent cocaine use in the old days?

Further they don't really consider the POSSIBILITY that a failed drug test in those days might have actually encouraged some folks to get help and improve their personal lives (and in the process, very likely their overall career performances)?

Further, they don't seem to realize that cocaine IS a rather blatant performance enhancing drug? Seriously? It is a MASSIVE stimulant. Long term damage, you bet. Game day edge, uhhhh, yeah - at least for a while.

I get the #####ing about putting weed in the same category as some of the other drugs. But the extent some folks would like to dictate a total lack of rgard for ANY personal matters to a PRIVATE organization of for-profit teams is mind-boggling to me. Perhaps there is some cocaine involved. It does sometimes lead to hallucinations and paranoia.

The NFL is a non-profit. It's was part of a special tax break written in 1966.

The National Football League takes in more than $9.5 billion per year and is exempt from Federal taxes. As a nonprofit, it earns more than the Y, the Red Cross, Goodwill, the Salvation Army or Catholic Charities – yet it stands as one of the greatest profit-generating commercial advertising, entertainment and media enterprises ever created.

For the love of Richard Sherman, how can this be?

An arcane tax code change that eased the 1966 merger of the NFL with the old American Football League landed the new combined entity in section 501©6 of the tax code, designated as an industry association. The designation actually covers “chambers of commerce, real estate boards, boards of trade, and professional football leagues.”

The teams aren't non-profit but the league is. This means the league made about 10 billion tax free dollars in 2013. Just an FYI.

Ahem. A little fyi - local legend has it that Senator Russell Long - yes, son of the esteemed erstwhile Senator and Governor por la vida Huey P. Long - arranged for this little exemption as part of the, er, arrangement whereby the Great State of Louisiana gained a professional football franchise.

And you're .

 

[msudaisy26]

So let me get this straight...

Quite a few of you think it is GOOD thing that the NFL didn't really attempt to prevent cocaine use in the old days?

Further they don't really consider the POSSIBILITY that a failed drug test in those days might have actually encouraged some folks to get help and improve their personal lives (and in the process, very likely their overall career performances)?

Further, they don't seem to realize that cocaine IS a rather blatant performance enhancing drug? Seriously? It is a MASSIVE stimulant. Long term damage, you bet. Game day edge, uhhhh, yeah - at least for a while.

I get the #####ing about putting weed in the same category as some of the other drugs. But the extent some folks would like to dictate a total lack of rgard for ANY personal matters to a PRIVATE organization of for-profit teams is mind-boggling to me. Perhaps there is some cocaine involved. It does sometimes lead to hallucinations and paranoia.

Do you really think the NFL's drug policy is helping anyone other than the NFL and their corporate brand identity? Give me a break. If LT was suspended/banned from the NFL we would of never witnessed an all time great do his thing and his life would of been significantly worse. A lose/lose.

I think its hilarious your handle/avatar is taken from Chris Farley. A man that loved his cocaine to death quite literally.

And had they had a more strict policy back in the day maybe Leonard Little wouldn't have killed someone while driving drunk, but that is ok as long as he is there on Sunday. I am sure that family forgot all about their family member because Little was out there helping the Rams win a super bowl.

.

The fact is, whether you agree with it or not, smoking weed is illegal so Josh Gordon should be suspended, and Blackmon isn't just drinking, he already has at least 1 dui and that is against the law and he is putting innocent people at risk, but there should be no penalty as long as he helps your fantasy team.

 

[tone1oc]

So let me get this straight...

Quite a few of you think it is GOOD thing that the NFL didn't really attempt to prevent cocaine use in the old days?

Further they don't really consider the POSSIBILITY that a failed drug test in those days might have actually encouraged some folks to get help and improve their personal lives (and in the process, very likely their overall career performances)?

Further, they don't seem to realize that cocaine IS a rather blatant performance enhancing drug? Seriously? It is a MASSIVE stimulant. Long term damage, you bet. Game day edge, uhhhh, yeah - at least for a while.

I get the #####ing about putting weed in the same category as some of the other drugs. But the extent some folks would like to dictate a total lack of rgard for ANY personal matters to a PRIVATE organization of for-profit teams is mind-boggling to me. Perhaps there is some cocaine involved. It does sometimes lead to hallucinations and paranoia.

Do you really think the NFL's drug policy is helping anyone other than the NFL and their corporate brand identity? Give me a break. If LT was suspended/banned from the NFL we would of never witnessed an all time great do his thing and his life would of been significantly worse. A lose/lose.

I think its hilarious your handle/avatar is taken from Chris Farley. A man that loved his cocaine to death quite literally.

And had they had a more strict policy back in the day maybe Leonard Little wouldn't have killed someone while driving drunk, but that is ok as long as he is there on Sunday. I am sure that family forgot all about their family member because Little was out there helping the Rams win a super bowl.

.

The fact is, whether you agree with it or not, smoking weed is illegal so Josh Gordon should be suspended, and Blackmon isn't just drinking, he already has at least 1 dui and that is against the law and he is putting innocent people at risk, but there should be no penalty as long as he helps your fantasy team.

Yikes.. So much fail here

If NFL had a stricter policy back then Little would of been just another ex-NFL player getting in trouble with drugs/alcohol. The NFLs draconian drug policy (that completely turns head to PEDs) doesn't do anything to fix people. It does fix the image of the NFL though, and that's what the policy is really all really about.

The fact is I never mentioned Gordon, Blackmon or any other player than LT and also never said a thing about their issues, right or wrong. Are you so blinded from your own quest for morality that you cannot comprehend my post?

BTW, I'm not sure our society would function too well if you removed alcoholics & drug addicts from their jobs.

 

[msudaisy26]

So let me get this straight...

Quite a few of you think it is GOOD thing that the NFL didn't really attempt to prevent cocaine use in the old days?

Further they don't really consider the POSSIBILITY that a failed drug test in those days might have actually encouraged some folks to get help and improve their personal lives (and in the process, very likely their overall career performances)?

Further, they don't seem to realize that cocaine IS a rather blatant performance enhancing drug? Seriously? It is a MASSIVE stimulant. Long term damage, you bet. Game day edge, uhhhh, yeah - at least for a while.

I get the #####ing about putting weed in the same category as some of the other drugs. But the extent some folks would like to dictate a total lack of rgard for ANY personal matters to a PRIVATE organization of for-profit teams is mind-boggling to me. Perhaps there is some cocaine involved. It does sometimes lead to hallucinations and paranoia.

Do you really think the NFL's drug policy is helping anyone other than the NFL and their corporate brand identity? Give me a break. If LT was suspended/banned from the NFL we would of never witnessed an all time great do his thing and his life would of been significantly worse. A lose/lose.

I think its hilarious your handle/avatar is taken from Chris Farley. A man that loved his cocaine to death quite literally.

And had they had a more strict policy back in the day maybe Leonard Little wouldn't have killed someone while driving drunk, but that is ok as long as he is there on Sunday. I am sure that family forgot all about their family member because Little was out there helping the Rams win a super bowl.

.

The fact is, whether you agree with it or not, smoking weed is illegal so Josh Gordon should be suspended, and Blackmon isn't just drinking, he already has at least 1 dui and that is against the law and he is putting innocent people at risk, but there should be no penalty as long as he helps your fantasy team.

Yikes.. So much fail here

If NFL had a stricter policy back then Little would of been just another ex-NFL player getting in trouble with drugs/alcohol. The NFLs draconian drug policy (that completely turns head to PEDs) doesn't do anything to fix people. It does fix the image of the NFL though, and that's what the policy is really all really about.

The fact is I never mentioned Gordon, Blackmon or any other player than LT and also never said a thing about their issues, right or wrong. Are you so blinded from your own quest for morality that you cannot comprehend my post?

BTW, I'm not sure our society would function too well if you removed alcoholics & drug addicts from their jobs.

Actually the fail is on your end is by saying it is a lose lose because we wouldn't have seen him play football. Sorry, but there are more important things in this life then watching someone play football, and the assumption that if he didn't play football his life would have been worse. You have no idea what his life would have been like if he didn't play football.

Another fail on your end is in your last statement, and it fails on so many levels. Maybe you haven't left the house in the last 5 or 6 years, or maybe you choose to be blind to it but our society really isn't functioning that well, but that is another topic.

 

[McGarnicle]

I would love to watch Ndamukong Suh play a game whacked out of his mind on crack.

 

[Milkman]

Lol at doing crack 3 times a week.

 

[NCCommish]

So let me get this straight...

Quite a few of you think it is GOOD thing that the NFL didn't really attempt to prevent cocaine use in the old days?

Further they don't really consider the POSSIBILITY that a failed drug test in those days might have actually encouraged some folks to get help and improve their personal lives (and in the process, very likely their overall career performances)?

Further, they don't seem to realize that cocaine IS a rather blatant performance enhancing drug? Seriously? It is a MASSIVE stimulant. Long term damage, you bet. Game day edge, uhhhh, yeah - at least for a while.

I get the #####ing about putting weed in the same category as some of the other drugs. But the extent some folks would like to dictate a total lack of rgard for ANY personal matters to a PRIVATE organization of for-profit teams is mind-boggling to me. Perhaps there is some cocaine involved. It does sometimes lead to hallucinations and paranoia.

The NFL is a non-profit. It's was part of a special tax break written in 1966.

The National Football League takes in more than $9.5 billion per year and is exempt from Federal taxes. As a nonprofit, it earns more than the Y, the Red Cross, Goodwill, the Salvation Army or Catholic Charities – yet it stands as one of the greatest profit-generating commercial advertising, entertainment and media enterprises ever created.

For the love of Richard Sherman, how can this be?

An arcane tax code change that eased the 1966 merger of the NFL with the old American Football League landed the new combined entity in section 501©6 of the tax code, designated as an industry association. The designation actually covers “chambers of commerce, real estate boards, boards of trade, and professional football leagues.”

The teams aren't non-profit but the league is. This means the league made about 10 billion tax free dollars in 2013. Just an FYI.

Ahem. A little fyi - local legend has it that Senator Russell Long - yes, son of the esteemed erstwhile Senator and Governor por la vida Huey P. Long - arranged for this little exemption as part of the, er, arrangement whereby the Great State of Louisiana gained a professional football franchise.

And you're .

Nice background report, thanks.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

So let me get this straight...

Quite a few of you think it is GOOD thing that the NFL didn't really attempt to prevent cocaine use in the old days?

Further they don't really consider the POSSIBILITY that a failed drug test in those days might have actually encouraged some folks to get help and improve their personal lives (and in the process, very likely their overall career performances)?

Further, they don't seem to realize that cocaine IS a rather blatant performance enhancing drug? Seriously? It is a MASSIVE stimulant. Long term damage, you bet. Game day edge, uhhhh, yeah - at least for a while.

I get the #####ing about putting weed in the same category as some of the other drugs. But the extent some folks would like to dictate a total lack of rgard for ANY personal matters to a PRIVATE organization of for-profit teams is mind-boggling to me. Perhaps there is some cocaine involved. It does sometimes lead to hallucinations and paranoia.

The NFL is a non-profit. It's was part of a special tax break written in 1966.

The National Football League takes in more than $9.5 billion per year and is exempt from Federal taxes. As a nonprofit, it earns more than the Y, the Red Cross, Goodwill, the Salvation Army or Catholic Charities – yet it stands as one of the greatest profit-generating commercial advertising, entertainment and media enterprises ever created.

For the love of Richard Sherman, how can this be?

An arcane tax code change that eased the 1966 merger of the NFL with the old American Football League landed the new combined entity in section 501©6 of the tax code, designated as an industry association. The designation actually covers “chambers of commerce, real estate boards, boards of trade, and professional football leagues.”

The teams aren't non-profit but the league is. This means the league made about 10 billion tax free dollars in 2013. Just an FYI.

That's a huge misnomer. The NFL as a whole doesn't get any more tax breaks than any other big corporations do. The NFL as a league didn't make much of anything in 2013, they distributed it all to the teams - which paid taxes.

The 10B tax free dollars is just completely false. There have been many years the NFL non-profit organization operates in the red. But the teams, who receive the cash, do not. Some have even stated that the net tax payments by the league as a whole might be HIGHER with the non-profit NFL acting as pass-through to the teams rather than paying taxes as one huge for-profit entity (where they could likely find more loopholes like every other big corporation out there - the bigger the organization, the more loopholes seem to be available). The referenced law and backdoor deal had everything to do with antitrust laws and nothing to do with tax evasion. Feel free to make a case that the antitrust exceptions aren't fair, but the tax thing that always seems to get everyone all riled up is completely baseless. Nobody ever looks past the surface of "non-profit NFL" to see what the deal really is.

 

[Ilov80s]

I didn't read the thread, but I will add that testing positive for coke is a lot harder than testing positive for weed. Someone probably already pointed that out tho.

 

[FUBAR]

I didn't read the thread, but I will add that testing positive for coke is a lot harder than testing positive for weed. Someone probably already pointed that out tho.

It's interesting how the worse drugs get out of your system faster, which makes them in one way, a smarter choice for someone seeking ways to not get caught.