Soulfly3
Footballguy
Im pretty confident not talking to the cameras is easier than not hanging out with your best buds.
see what I did there?
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!
WR Josh Gordon, KC (5 Viewers)
- Thread starter Matt Waldman
- Start date
see what I did there?
massraider
Footballguy
That's correct. They don't really care if they smoke weed.
So what?
Frankly, the testing is such a joke, that the NFL has pretty much legalized it. "Hey, we have a once a year pee test (the easiest to fool), to satisfy the more conservative fans, coming up at training camp!!
The NFL isn't leading a witch hunt, going after stoners, and there are more than enough quotes around combine time from scouts about how a positive weed test is really no big deal. They do one lousy test in training camp, and really, it's more of a dumbest-guys-in-the-NFL contest. You have to behave completely recklessly, or be completely stupid, or simply not give a ####, in order to fail one of these.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Unfortunately there ARE negative effects to the brain, but this is predominantly in people before the age of 21-25, with very minimal effect starting once people hit age 20-21 or so.There are no changes to the brain.
How much of an effect?? Still to be determined, but based on behavioral evidence (I work in behavioral health) there is definitely a higher chance of a negative impact on the 21 and under age group since the brain is still developing into your early 20s.
But lets not go crazy. This negative effect isn't brain damage or anything. It's more of an increased likelihood in becoming dependent on weed as a coping mechanism, and it's main issue is exacerbating existing issues, such as depression, schizophrenia, bipolar.......and so on. Basically in the age group of 21 and under weed will make these behavioral issue worse in a lot (not all) of people at a much higher rate than when people are over 21.
However, given the pretty minimal negative effects overall from marijuana compared to pretty much every drug ever (hell even fast food), along with the multitude of positives that weed brings to the table as an alternative to these things.................it should and WILL be legal in 50 states soon (already should be, stupid), and won't be on the banned substance list for the NFL or any sport soon enough.
It's not all that hard to spin the fact that weed is much healthier for the human body as a pain killer than all the crap these players are currently throwing into their bodies, so this "negative image due to drugs" crap will come to a screeching halt, as it should.
Much like many things in the past, the general public isn't quite up to speed on marijuana, but they will be.
Weed will definitely need an age limit like alcohol, and it should be 21 just like alcohol.
cobalt_27
Footballguy
I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss possible enduring direct neurological effects of chronic marijuana use. An excellent recent review paper (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3037578/#!po=9.25926) suggest persistent cognitive sequelae secondary to marijuana use, as does this 2012 Duke/New Zealand prospective longitudinal study (http://www.pnas.org/content/109/40/E2657.short)...among others. Not definitive yet, but the emerging literature seems to suggest that problems extend beyond social/psychiatric factors.Unfortunately there ARE negative effects to the brain, but this is predominantly in people before the age of 21-25, with very minimal effect starting once people hit age 20-21 or so.
How much of an effect?? Still to be determined, but based on behavioral evidence (I work in behavioral health) there is definitely a higher chance of a negative impact on the 21 and under age group since the brain is still developing into your early 20s.
But lets not go crazy. This negative effect isn't brain damage or anything. It's more of an increased likelihood in becoming dependent on weed as a coping mechanism, and it's main issue is exacerbating existing issues, such as depression, schizophrenia, bipolar.......and so on. Basically in the age group of 21 and under weed will make these behavioral issue worse in a lot (not all) of people at a much higher rate than when people are over 21.
However, given the pretty minimal negative effects overall from marijuana compared to pretty much every drug ever (hell even fast food), along with the multitude of positives that weed brings to the table as an alternative to these things.................it should and WILL be legal in 50 states soon (already should be, stupid), and won't be on the banned substance list for the NFL or any sport soon enough.
It's not all that hard to spin the fact that weed is much healthier for the human body as a pain killer than all the crap these players are currently throwing into their bodies, so this "negative image due to drugs" crap will come to a screeching halt, as it should.
Much like many things in the past, the general public isn't quite up to speed on marijuana, but they will be.
Weed will definitely need an age limit like alcohol, and it should be 21 just like alcohol.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Overuse of ANYTHING can cause serious effects. You can die from drinking too much water for God sake.
Do one for alcohol next. Then do one for painkillers. Then do one for PLAYING FOOTBALL!!
All far worse than marijuana.
Last edited by a moderator:
This really doesn't say much, seeing as how I doubt he has any first-hand insight or relationship with Gordon, but seeing as how we're discussing/giving weight to/disregarding quotes from Schefter, Greg Little, etc, I figured I'd post this:
Chris Carter seems to think that Gordon has a drug problem & puts more importance on getting high than on football.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/06/03/cris-carter-josh-gordon-has-to-want-to-get-clean-first/
Chris Carter seems to think that Gordon has a drug problem & puts more importance on getting high than on football.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/06/03/cris-carter-josh-gordon-has-to-want-to-get-clean-first/
Last edited by a moderator:
Phenix
Footballguy
I know what he means.
I got some G-13 recently and I don't care about football when I am on that.
Government stuff is heavy!
DaveGrumbles
Footballguy
True, the NFL would lose ALL revenue if the general public even suspected some players might be using marijuana. It reminds me of the time the NFL made ZERO dollars during Lawrence Taylor's entire career because he was snorting fistfuls of coke and ordering up multiple prostitutes on the daily.
Those were dark days indeed. Back then every NFL employee had to work for free and Nielsen ratings were something like 0.0...even for the Super Bowl.
At least that's the way I heard it...
Concept Coop
Footballguy
I know what you mean. I have this friend who was all, "lets snort this pot', and I was all like, "Never! It's a gateway drug!" Next thing I know he died from the meth. True story.
cstu
Footballguy
One of the reasons the NBA is not as popular as the NFL is its image of having 'thug' players. It's still very popular but there are people turned off by the their negative view of the players (based in reality or not).
The NFL wants to stay the biggest sport in the U.S. and to do that they can't give fans any reason to stop watching. If that means a few extremely talented players drop out then so be it. Image is everything to the NFL and even if they let a troubled player back in the league they have to at least appear as concerned about it as any fringe fan.
cstu
Footballguy
Bigboy10182000
Footballguy
Concept Coop
Footballguy
I've never heard anyone suggest that they don't follow the NBA due to their drug testing policies, though. I think it has a lot more to do with the NBA's relationship with (commercial) Hip-Hop culture in general--the attire, the language, the politics, etc. I suppose weed is part of that, but only if it's glorified.
I do think the NBA is recovering from an image problem, but it has more to do with And-1, cornrows, and baggy pants than the drug policy. The player group is too far removed from the majority of the American public--people like to chear on players that they can identify with. The American NFL player group is a much more diverse than the American NBA player group. People on a farm in Montana can find NFL players that they relate to; not so much in the NBA. On top of that, the NFL has done a great job of pushing The Shield as a collection of teams, rather than a collection of players. It can survive the Michael Vicks and Aaron Hernadezes much better than the NBA can because of it.
I agree that the NFL thinks it's protecting it's image, but I question it, personally. In the next 10 years they're likely to look silly for doing it.
Last edited by a moderator:
DaveGrumbles
Footballguy
I can absolutely agree with the first part of your statement. But the reasoning behind that is a much deeper argument than should be discussed in a Josh Gordon thread. Simply put, the NBA does not have high profile arrest records anywhere close to that of the NFL. So there isn't a greater 'thug' factor in the NBA than the NFL which lets us know the 'thug' image comes from something other than behavior or a code of conduct policy. The honest truth is the NBA is widely considered a black man's sport just as the NHL is considered a white man's sport and both are hurt on a national marketing level for those reasons. The NFL and MLB enjoy a multi-cultural image and therefore will always enjoy a wider audience regardless of player perception.
I stand by the fact that the NFL is doing NOTHING to clean up the NFL by taking a harder stance than other leagues on this particular issue. And, in fact, by exposing recreational drug use itself the NFL creates its own bad PR. So I still find their motivation a bit odd.
But I get the overall policy...its about dollars and CYA. The actual nuts and bolts of the policy is just something I don't agree with.
Last edited by a moderator:
thriftyrocker
Footballguy
The NBA has a lot of problems and thug players or too black are far from the top of the list. Their biggest problem is they have a terrible product for most of the year with 20+ bad teams and a majority of the regular season is only of interest to degenerate gamblers. The 32nd best NFL team has a better chance to win a championship than the 5th best NBA team, perhaps not literally if you're looking at Vegas odds, but realistically what chance do the Pacers or Clippers have. This is exacerbated by things like Lakers/Kings game 6.
That is ridiculous. Identifying with the athlete is not the problem. Every NBA fanbase would love to have Iverson in his prime. A great player is a great player. Larry Bird was not more popular nationally than Magic Johnson and this was 30+ years ago. No one is going to buy a Doug McDermott jersey next month.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Pot does not equal "thug"
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
the reason the NBA isnt as popular is because it sucks
Concept Coop
Footballguy
It's only a theory or opinion, as I don't have the resources needed to test it, just as you don't have them to disprove it.
If humans don't want to identify with the athlete--why do you feel Yao Ming was voted into All-Star games during seasons in which he couldn't suit up? Why do you think the Beastie Boys played on radio stations that Run DMC didn't?
Allen Iverson is an odd figure to point to, as his rise was directly tied to the decline in viewership. And he's pointed to as one of the players Stern was trying to censor with his dress code. Sure, true NBA fans would love a prime Iverson as he'd help them win games. But the product as a whole is harder to sell to America if Allen Iverson is the face.
Race is a part of it, but not all if it, and I don't think I suggested otherwise. Thus, Magic<>Iverson.
Last edited by a moderator:
thriftyrocker
Footballguy
1.3 billion voters who wouldn't vote otherwise. And certainly he wasn't the first injured star player to get voted to an all star game. It happens regularly. Iverson got voted in 2010 when he was injured half the time and a shell of his former self.
A better example for you would be the greater national fanbase (and the polar opposite) for Duke than Michigan State or Kansas. But still a great player is a great player. Duke wouldn't matter if they weren't always elite. Other white-leaning programs that are merely great don't register nationally (Wisc, Gonz).
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Another example would be Jeremy Lin - his popularity with the Asian American population was off the charts.
My wife who is Vietnamese, never watched a game of baskeball before or after Linsanity - but watched every Knicks game that season, even on nights I didn't want to.
Concept Coop
Footballguy
Both of your examples feel like reaches, based on the points I was trying to make. Perhaps I am not expressing them well.
The notion that the NBA doesn't have an image issue--or isn't recovering from one, at least--seems naive to me. And, again, it isn't just about race. The large majority of rap music is consumed by white males between 18-25 YO. I'd be willing to bet they were the leading consumers of AI jerseys too. It's not them that the NBA is losing, or failing to attract.
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123
Footballguy
I think white people smoke some dub also...........am I wrong?
Maybe I missed something somewhere, but somehow pointing to race for the marijuana issue doesn't really make sense to me. It's not a race thing. Basically everyone I know (white or black) either smokes weed or doesnt care in the slightest that other people do, and all but a very select few would like to see it legalized.
Bottom line, Gordon is an idiot and deserves what he gets. However, banning weed is about as silly as banning the players from eating Mcdonalds. It would make more sense to ban them from eating that trash.
Maybe I missed something somewhere, but somehow pointing to race for the marijuana issue doesn't really make sense to me. It's not a race thing. Basically everyone I know (white or black) either smokes weed or doesnt care in the slightest that other people do, and all but a very select few would like to see it legalized.
Bottom line, Gordon is an idiot and deserves what he gets. However, banning weed is about as silly as banning the players from eating Mcdonalds. It would make more sense to ban them from eating that trash.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
And if the NFL's image totally tanked, and the NBA's was at an all time high, the NFL would still be 5x more popular.
It's a superior sport. Period.
It's a superior sport. Period.
Concept Coop
Footballguy
Of course. I don't think the country would care in the slightest if the NFL stopped testing for it.
In terms of drug testing--I'd agree. In terms of the NBA's image--we sure got of track, didn't we?--I'd disagree.
He's an addict and I hope he gets help.
McDonald's is a lot more harmful to your body than Marijuana. I'd say sillier.
DaveGrumbles
Footballguy
ghostguy123
Footballguy
I just meant Gordon deserves whatever he gets in terms of a suspension. If they banned eating carrots and you eat carrots, you deserve whatever the suspension is.
Of course if he has a legit problem I would hope he gets help for that.
Of course if he has a legit problem I would hope he gets help for that.
thriftyrocker
Footballguy
You mean reaching like pointing out one of 5 Asian NBA players? To a certain point Yao was just a curiosity.
The notion that the NBA is still recovering from its image issue of the early 2000s seems naive to me. The whole dress code policy is almost 10 years old now. Nobody is avoiding the NBA because Westbrook is wearing Urkel glasses. No one is avoiding the NBA because of Ron World Peace or Latrell Sprewell. They're avoiding it because is unwatchable unless the Heat or possibly the Thunder are playing.
While it's probably true outside the area his primary fanbase were people who would latch onto, not reject, rap culture, inside the Philadelphia area he was more or less universally loved. Much more so than McNabb and at a higher level than Dawk.
I'm not sure who which NBA players fit your stereotype. Nobody cares enough about JR Smith to not watch the NBA because of his tattoos especially when all the focus is on Durant crying about his mama or Griffin selling terrible plastic cars.
cstu
Footballguy
We got off track a long time ago when it became about whether the NFL should test for marijuana. The fact is that the NBA's image is that of a bunch of drug users - the league actually allows players to test positive for marijuana 3 times before suspending them on the 4th. The NBA's testing is also notoriously easy to evade, especially after the season.
Josh Howard "Everyone know NBA players do smoke marijuana." - BTW, Howard has never been suspended for drug use.
cstu
Footballguy
Which school would you rather send your kids to - the one that suspends kids for having drugs in school or the one that doesn't but you've seen a bunch of kids smoking weed outside?
That's why they suspend players - it makes them look like they are tough on drug use.
thriftyrocker
Footballguy
Lomas Brown says "At least 50 percent of NFL players smoke pot"
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8292ebd3/article/brown-at-least-50-percent-of-nfl-players-smoke-pot
The NFL would not be less popular if Blackmon and Gordon played. Possibly it could not be more popular, but if they played there would be 2 more great players and interest would be very minutely up.
Concept Coop
Footballguy
You mean like Jeremy Lin? Did you see Yi's jersey sales his rookie season? And even Sun Yue got more buzz than the average nobody.
To a true fan, maybe, especially those influenced by nostalgia. But the pace is much faster across the board, however, and the average fan wants points--threes and dunks, which are happening at a faster pace than ever before. I highly doubt viewership as a whole is down because we miss hand checking and traditional big men.
And the NBA is as exciting as it's ever been, to those paying attention. Unless you're arguing parity is exciting. In that case, the NBA has never been exciting. And I highly doubt viewership--made up of big markets and LeBron/Durant fans/haters--are worried about the Jazz and Timberwolves not being able to sign big free agents.
ETA: The Heat?!
Last edited by a moderator:
thriftyrocker
Footballguy
Almost every NBA Jam pair was playable. I think the futility of the 2nd tier star has increased substantially. Compare All-NBA 3rd team now vs. 20 years ago.
DaveGrumbles
Footballguy
Show me the NBA players that are 'smoking outside the school' in your scenario. In contrast, the NFL is putting a blunt in someone's mouth and pushing them onto the curb of the school for all to see. My entire point is there should always be a drug and code of cunduct policy for any league or business for that matter (we agree on that). But the general point is that you don't play moral police and publicly display something that the player appears to be keeping private thereby protecting the NFL's image. If the player is stupid enough to show up to NFL facilities stoned, or does interviews standing next to a huge bong, or smokes up after every touchdown then your policy allows you to drop the hammer on that guy.
Over the last 20 plus years, the NFL has a multitude of examples of murders, rapists, drunk drivers, drug dealers/addicts, gang members, wife beaters and various other criminal acts associated with its players. I challenge you to show me a similar list of NBA players fitting the same description. If you do, I promise my NFL list will be much longer.
So I say, what is the policy doing to actually curb such behavior?
To answer the question, I'd send my kids to the imaginary school that doesn't pretend to be tough using outdated policies and actually makes a valid attempt to ensure the students are worthy of being at the school in the first place.
DaveGrumbles
Footballguy
cobalt_27
Footballguy
You were presenting a position, as someone who works in "behavioral health," that dismissed (or reflected a lack of awareness of) the literature presented by scientists in the behavioral health field that is contrary to your position. If you want to argue the excessive water/hydration position, I think that reflects a lack of seriousness about the potential problems stemming from chronic marijuana abuse. As a specialist in the behavioral health field, myself, I find that disheartening and a bit disingenuous.ghostguy123 said:
amnesiac
beer is good
i wasn't directing that comment to anyone in particular, i just feel this thread has little to do with Gordon at this point.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123
Footballguy
And again, if we want to talk about "chronic" use, we need to talk about the billion other things that cause health issues if used chronically.
And just how chronic are we talking here? A joint a day? 25 joints a day?
Chronic...........fitting word, haha.
And just how chronic are we talking here? A joint a day? 25 joints a day?
Chronic...........fitting word, haha.
cstu
Footballguy
I posted above Josh Howard admitted publically that NBA players smoke weed and it's not big deal.
There are 12-15 players on a NBA team vs. 53 on an NFL team (plus practice squad and IR) so that would explain why there seems to be so many NFL players getting in trouble.
Like I've said, the league isn't trying to get users out of the league, only give the impression they are.
Bruce Hammond
Footballguy
Goodell: "What do you have to say for yourself?"
Gordon: "I had a cold, I was delirious, didn't know what was going on, my mom came over and gave me cough syr--'
Goodell: "Enough already. Used that one last time."
Gordon: "Oh, I forgot. Bad memory, not sure why."
Goodell: "I think I know why. Well?"
Gordon: "Ummmm... Grandmama came over with some brownies, they were sooooo good! How was I supposed to know?"
Goodell: "Uh huh, right.
Indefinite suspension, eligible to be reinstated if you can stay off mom's cough syrup and grandmama's brownies for a year. Next case."
Gordon:
Soulfly3:
Gordon: "I had a cold, I was delirious, didn't know what was going on, my mom came over and gave me cough syr--'
Goodell: "Enough already. Used that one last time."
Gordon: "Oh, I forgot. Bad memory, not sure why."
Goodell: "I think I know why. Well?"
Gordon: "Ummmm... Grandmama came over with some brownies, they were sooooo good! How was I supposed to know?"
Goodell: "Uh huh, right.
Indefinite suspension, eligible to be reinstated if you can stay off mom's cough syrup and grandmama's brownies for a year. Next case."Gordon:
Soulfly3:
Last edited by a moderator:
cobalt_27
Footballguy
It seems your position is that marijuana is not intrinsically a problem. When used in moderation it's as healthy as water. But, like anything (including water), when used in excess, that is the problem. And from your point of view you seem to think the deleterious effects are emotional, not neurological.ghostguy123 said:
Am I close?
Ditka Butkus
Footballguy
http://www.news-herald.com/sports/20140604/bob-frantz-browns-should-cut-troubled-gordon
As badly as Gordon’s college career ended due to his inability or unwillingness to stay away from drugs, his professional career has been worse. He was suspended for four games last June, although it was later reduced to two, for violating the NFL’s substance abuse policy, which is a clear indication that he was already in Stage 2 of the league’s drug program. No player can be suspended, according to the policy, for a first offense.
That means Gordon was already in Stage 3 of the drug program when he was informed over the winter that he had tested positive for marijuana once again. A Stage 3 violation would effectively banish Gordon from the league — and more importantly from the Browns — for a minimum of one year, after which he would have to apply for reinstatement from the commissioner, which is not automatic.
That brings us to Memorial Day weekend.
Gordon’s speeding ticket for doing 74 in a 60-mph zone in Strongsville is largely irrelevant. What is relevant, however, is the fact that he had three friends in his car at the time, and that one or all of them had been smoking weed recently enough as to alert the police officer to the smell when he stopped them.
Gordon was, of course, not charged with possession of the marijuana. The three passengers probably played rock-paper-scissors to decide who was going to take the fall and keep the drugs out of Gordon’s hands, and one would hope that the loser of the contest got paid handsomely by his NFL buddy. But the fact remains that Gordon, already facing a full year away from the game — at minimum — was still unable to stay away from drugs even as NFL officials were mulling over his banishment.
Just got to thinking....I wonder if the NFL tested Gordon after this incident?
As badly as Gordon’s college career ended due to his inability or unwillingness to stay away from drugs, his professional career has been worse. He was suspended for four games last June, although it was later reduced to two, for violating the NFL’s substance abuse policy, which is a clear indication that he was already in Stage 2 of the league’s drug program. No player can be suspended, according to the policy, for a first offense.
That means Gordon was already in Stage 3 of the drug program when he was informed over the winter that he had tested positive for marijuana once again. A Stage 3 violation would effectively banish Gordon from the league — and more importantly from the Browns — for a minimum of one year, after which he would have to apply for reinstatement from the commissioner, which is not automatic.
That brings us to Memorial Day weekend.
Gordon’s speeding ticket for doing 74 in a 60-mph zone in Strongsville is largely irrelevant. What is relevant, however, is the fact that he had three friends in his car at the time, and that one or all of them had been smoking weed recently enough as to alert the police officer to the smell when he stopped them.
Gordon was, of course, not charged with possession of the marijuana. The three passengers probably played rock-paper-scissors to decide who was going to take the fall and keep the drugs out of Gordon’s hands, and one would hope that the loser of the contest got paid handsomely by his NFL buddy. But the fact remains that Gordon, already facing a full year away from the game — at minimum — was still unable to stay away from drugs even as NFL officials were mulling over his banishment.
Just got to thinking....I wonder if the NFL tested Gordon after this incident?
Last edited by a moderator:
Soulfly3
Footballguy
^^^^^^
Was that article written by a High School newspaper?
"Rock, paper, scissors to decide who was going to take the fall" ?
"loser paid handsomely by his NFL buddy"?
Also, Stage 2 has TWO PHASES in it. Something this author clearly has NO knowledge of. Which means Gordon IS NOT NECESSARILY in Stage 3.
-------------------------------------
What a sorry read.
Also, pretty slanderous to accuse a guy of paying off his buddies with literally NO evidence.
Was that article written by a High School newspaper?
"Rock, paper, scissors to decide who was going to take the fall" ?
"loser paid handsomely by his NFL buddy"?
Also, Stage 2 has TWO PHASES in it. Something this author clearly has NO knowledge of. Which means Gordon IS NOT NECESSARILY in Stage 3.
-------------------------------------
What a sorry read.
Also, pretty slanderous to accuse a guy of paying off his buddies with literally NO evidence.
Last edited by a moderator:
