Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

RB Kareem Hunt, CLE


Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, JuniorNB said:

Obviously not a very intelligent fella.  The guy was on tape roughing up a woman and got a second chance.  I understand that weed isn't the same as heroin and may be a very mild drug, but he's aware that it's against NFL rules. He can't resume his marijuana habit once he's dome playing? Guy was fortunate enough to be born with talent that can make him a multi-millionaire for playing a game 16 times a year. And he can't manage to live those years without getting high? 

Or just like not speed around town with it in your car. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, JuniorNB said:

Obviously not a very intelligent fella.  The guy was on tape roughing up a woman and got a second chance.  I understand that weed isn't the same as heroin and may be a very mild drug, but he's aware that it's against NFL rules. He can't resume his marijuana habit once he's dome playing? Guy was fortunate enough to be born with talent that can make him a multi-millionaire for playing a game 16 times a year. And he can't manage to live those years without getting high? 

Or maybe he was just driving down a highway like a regular person (aka faster than the speed limit) and his brother had a nickle bag on him?

Jesus, dude didn't kill a guy.  He was literally in his mom's car with his brother.

  • Like 2
  • Thinking 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, FGITLOTR said:

The fact that he avoided marijuana charges is HUGE, and to be honest, traveling 77 in a 60 isn’t that egregious. I hope new Browns management run scared and let another team sign him this off-season. For dynasty owners, this could be a blessing in disguise! 

I'd be shocked if this incident even raised an eyebrow for the Browns. The Browns are blessed to have 2 of the top-10 RB's in the NFL in my opinion, and aren't paying much for either. I envision Hunt being tendered at a 1st(or 2nd) round level, so I doubt any other team pays that price. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, travdogg said:

I'd be shocked if this incident even raised an eyebrow for the Browns. The Browns are blessed to have 2 of the top-10 RB's in the NFL in my opinion, and aren't paying much for either. I envision Hunt being tendered at a 1st(or 2nd) round level, so I doubt any other team pays that price. 

Good point about the cost. The only thing that could be an issue IMO is what has he promised to Browns coaches and management. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having such a small amount of weed nowadays is about as bad as letting your dog poop on your neighbor's lawn.  In the end, all he got was a speeding ticket, right?  This incident changes absolutely nothing as to the career path of Hunt.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

44 minutes ago, TheWinz said:

Having such a small amount of weed nowadays is about as bad as letting your dog poop on your neighbor's lawn.  In the end, all he got was a speeding ticket, right?  This incident changes absolutely nothing as to the career path of Hunt.

Sure but it could mean the NFL targets him for more drug testing. He also could have been swearing up and down to Cleveland that was clean and there was nothing to worry about, etc. We can't know those behind the scenes things. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bicycle_seat_sniffer said:

guess you guys don't remember how Goodell works...I could see a repeat offender suspension...remember charges are not necessary for being punished

What’s the repeat offense?  I don’t remember him getting popped for drugs before.  Am I missing something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Bayhawks said:

What’s the repeat offense?  I don’t remember him getting popped for drugs before.  Am I missing something?

 

10 minutes ago, Bayhawks said:

What’s the repeat offense?  I don’t remember him getting popped for drugs before.  Am I missing something?

personal conduct policy.....my brothers weed....that's a good one

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Ilov80s said:

Sure but it could mean the NFL targets him for more drug testing. He also could have been swearing up and down to Cleveland that was clean and there was nothing to worry about, etc. We can't know those behind the scenes things. 

Is Kareem already in the NFL's substance abuse program?  I am seriously asking, because I don't know.  He wasn't cited for driving while under the influence of marijuana, nor was he tested for it - it was only a speeding ticket.  To my knowledge, he has never failed a drug test. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TheWinz said:

Of course I do, but the frequency is unknown.  Care to venture a guess as to how many of the 1696 NFL players smoke?  I'll throw out a number - 305

I'm just saying they will pay more attention to Hunt after being cause with it.  Bringing attention to yourself isn't very smart, especially after his previous troubles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bicycle_seat_sniffer said:

Old Roger can do whatever he wants

 

Not really.  The CBA has a specific set of consequences for substances of abuse.  If he just decide to “do whatever he wants,” the NFLPA would challenge that.  In this case, they’d likely won.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bayhawks said:

Not really.  The CBA has a specific set of consequences for substances of abuse.  If he just decide to “do whatever he wants,” the NFLPA would challenge that.  In this case, they’d likely won.

If he's using they will get him, because they are going to have him peeing in a cup often.

Edited by JohnnyU
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, TheWinz said:

I will ask again - does anyone know if he has ever had a positive urine test, or if he is currently in the substance abuse program?  Those 2 questions are very relevant to his case.

I don’t think we’d know. I believe the first failure is kept confidential until a second one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

I don’t think we’d know. I believe the first failure is kept confidential until a second one.

Ah, I did not know that, thanx.  BTW, if anyone is interested, I found the NFL's Substance Abuse Policy...

https://nflpaweb.blob.core.windows.net/media/Default/Active Players/wellness/2019 Policy and Program on Substances of Abuse.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys are the biggest squares in the world.

Everyone I've known in my entire life who's over the age of 18 has ingested weed in some form at one point.  For an NFL player it's both a pain reliever and a stress reducer, and it's incredibly easy to mask that you use it when you're extremely active and drink a ton of water, as long as your use is sparing.  Only people with legitimate problems (Josh Gordon) or idiots (that guy who was moving pounds of it years ago, his name escapes me) get caught.

My point is, again, this is a huge nothing and is in no way connected to his earlier issues; which were actual issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, wgoldsph said:

You guys are the biggest squares in the world.

Everyone I've known in my entire life who's over the age of 18 has ingested weed in some form at one point.  For an NFL player it's both a pain reliever and a stress reducer, and it's incredibly easy to mask that you use it when you're extremely active and drink a ton of water, as long as your use is sparing.  Only people with legitimate problems (Josh Gordon) or idiots (that guy who was moving pounds of it years ago, his name escapes me) get caught.

My point is, again, this is a huge nothing and is in no way connected to his earlier issues; which were actual issues.

The bolded part isn't true.  They can take a hair sample within 90 days.https://www.healthline.com/health/hair-follicle-drug-test

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, JohnnyU said:

The bolded part isn't true.  They can take a hair sample within 90 days.https://www.healthline.com/health/hair-follicle-drug-test

Is the hair sample test legal in the NFL?  The testing is typically spelled out in a company’s drug and alcohol policy and when unions are involved, the testing method is part of the CBA.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DocHolliday said:

Is the hair sample test legal in the NFL?  The testing is typically spelled out in a company’s drug and alcohol policy and when unions are involved, the testing method is part of the CBA.   

I don't know why it wouldn't be legal.  It's the most accurate form of testing.  I can't imagine the NFL owners letting a less accurate (urine test) get passed over a more accurate test (hair).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JohnnyU said:

I don't know why it wouldn't be legal.  It's the most accurate form of testing.  I can't imagine the NFL owners letting a less accurate (urine test) get passed over a more accurate test (hair).

It’s typically the union members that try to prohibit hair follicle testing from the D and A policy in the CBA.  It would not be the owners.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, DocHolliday said:

It’s typically the union members that try to prohibit hair follicle testing from the D and A policy in the CBA.  It would not be the owners.  

The owners could have fought against that in the collective bargaining negotiations.  Do we know what the policy is on hair testing?   Perhaps someone can provide a link to where they can't use it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, JohnnyU said:

The owners could have fought against that in the collective bargaining negotiations.  Do we know what the policy is on hair testing?   Perhaps someone can provide a link to where they can't use it.

I posted a link to the testing program a few posts above.  I skimmed through real fast, and the only collection method referenced is urine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tool said:

Why would an owner care if their players smoked weed anyway? Guess would be an image thing but that’s changing. 

True.  Weed is becoming more accepted every day.  It's legal for recreational purposes in 11 states, and 33 states have given in to medical marijuana.  The bad stigma of pot is only because some morons typed it as a schedule 1 drug many years ago.

I can't smoke because of my job, but my wife smokes like a chimney.  She is chill, has a great sense of humor, and isn't out wreaking havoc on society.  The medical professionals got it way wrong, and we can thank FDR for making it illegal back in 1937.

The world would be a better place if everyone was high all the time.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, TheWinz said:

True.  Weed is becoming more accepted every day.  It's legal for recreational purposes in 11 states, and 33 states have given in to medical marijuana.  The bad stigma of pot is only because some morons typed it as a schedule 1 drug many years ago.

I can't smoke because of my job, but my wife smokes like a chimney.  She is chill, has a great sense of humor, and isn't out wreaking havoc on society.  The medical professionals got it way wrong, and we can thank FDR for making it illegal back in 1937.

The world would be a better place if everyone was high all the time.  

I don't have anything against using weed, but it does make you lethargic.  That's the last thing young people need to be when they are trying to make it in this world.  That wasn't meant for KH, he probably doesn't need to be successful at anything given his probable bank account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, JohnnyU said:

I don't have anything against using weed, but it does make you lethargic.  That's the last thing young people need to be when they are trying to make it in this world.  That wasn't meant for KH, he probably doesn't need to be successful at anything given his probable bank account.

Not necessarily true. It does  affect some people in this way but not all.  First, their are now a lot of different strains that have different effects on people.  Also, don't smoke a ton any more but when I was younger my friends and I would many times go hiking, play hoops, and do other stuff high.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Tool said:

Not necessarily true. It does  affect some people in this way but not all.  First, their are now a lot of different strains that have different effects on people.  Also, don't smoke a ton any more but when I was younger my friends and I would many times go hiking, play hoops, and do other stuff high.

Speaking from experience, weed is the only drug I think I ever had the choice of "turning it off" when I wanted to.  I could be high as a kite one minute, then choose to sober up.  Sure, bloodshot and/or glassy eyes are still there (along with smelling like weed), but anyone who has smoked alot knows what I am talking about.  And for those who have never smoked, you can only get so high, and that depends on the quality of the weed.  I can remember smoking an ounce of pot in one sitting with my brother and a few friends back in the mid 80's, but a few hits of today's weed would make you higher than all the weed you could smoke 30 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, TheWinz said:

Speaking from experience, weed is the only drug I think I ever had the choice of "turning it off" when I wanted to.  I could be high as a kite one minute, then choose to sober up.  Sure, bloodshot and/or glassy eyes are still there (along with smelling like weed), but anyone who has smoked alot knows what I am talking about.  And for those who have never smoked, you can only get so high, and that depends on the quality of the weed.  I can remember smoking an ounce of pot in one sitting with my brother and a few friends back in the mid 80's, but a few hits of today's weed would make you higher than all the weed you could smoke 30 years ago.

Your choice of dealers in the 80s were obviously suspect, but yes, in general weed is much stronger now than way-back-when.  In the early 70s you could get some very good weed, or in Ky, grow your own from those seeds of the very good (red bud in particular).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The weed talk is a red herring.  It's about Hunt's decision making, influences outside of football, etc.  With all the running backs available this off-season I'd be surprised if another team puts themselves in position to rely on Hunt as their #1 back entering the season, but it's relatively easy for the Browns to keep him around at a good cost.  Seems like the most likely outcome.  If Cleveland elects to let him go that's not a good sign (for all the behind the scenes reasons we're not privy to).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tool said:

Not necessarily true. It does  affect some people in this way but not all.  First, their are now a lot of different strains that have different effects on people.  Also, don't smoke a ton any more but when I was younger my friends and I would many times go hiking, play hoops, and do other stuff high.

I smoke before I lift, run or play basketball fairly close to 100% of the time.

Weed certainly impacts people differently, but I can't really imagine why any NFL team would really care if their players were smoking or not unless they are still hanging onto the idea that it's a gateway drug that is just going to lead to other more hardcore drugs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, trader jake said:

The weed talk is a red herring.  It's about Hunt's decision making, influences outside of football, etc.  With all the running backs available this off-season I'd be surprised if another team puts themselves in position to rely on Hunt as their #1 back entering the season, but it's relatively easy for the Browns to keep him around at a good cost.  Seems like the most likely outcome.  If Cleveland elects to let him go that's not a good sign (for all the behind the scenes reasons we're not privy to).

true, but only time will tell.  I'm sure some team will take a chance on Hunt unless he really messes up between now and then.  I'm unsure what the league policy is with hunt and his most recent transgression. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, menobrown said:

I smoke before I lift, run or play basketball fairly close to 100% of the time.

Weed certainly impacts people differently, but I can't really imagine why any NFL team would really care if their players were smoking or not unless they are still hanging onto the idea that it's a gateway drug that is just going to lead to other more hardcore drugs.

I believe that was a disproved myth some time ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, trader jake said:

The weed talk is a red herring.  It's about Hunt's decision making, influences outside of football, etc.  With all the running backs available this off-season I'd be surprised if another team puts themselves in position to rely on Hunt as their #1 back entering the season, but it's relatively easy for the Browns to keep him around at a good cost.  Seems like the most likely outcome.  If Cleveland elects to let him go that's not a good sign (for all the behind the scenes reasons we're not privy to).

Yes I think you hit the nail on the head with what this means.  This incident is really nothing in terms of league suspension but a guy who has made a few bad choices already the big issue this does to Kareem is make teams leery of trusting him. But the Browns know him, have him cheap and have Chubb if he something goes amiss. This is why, and I think I've posted here in another thread, even before this incident I felt the Browns would retain him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, menobrown said:

Yes I think you hit the nail on the head with what this means.  This incident is really nothing in terms of league suspension but a guy who has made a few bad choices already the big issue this does to Kareem is make teams leery of trusting him. But the Browns know him, have him cheap and have Chubb if he something goes amiss. This is why, and I think I've posted here in another thread, even before this incident I felt the Browns would retain him.

I don't think they retain him unless it's rally cheap.  If they have to match anything and sacrifice a pick in the process I don't think they will.  I guess it depends on what tender they put on him.

Dorsey was the one who brought him in, and it sounds like Cleveland is going away from Dorsey largely because of the off the field problem guys he was bringing in.  "The team did not meet its potential on or off the field" seems like tea leaves pointing to not signing guys who are already on a second chance and just had a minor incident. 

 

Edited by kittenmittens
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, kittenmittens said:

I don't think they retain him unless it's rally cheap.  If they have to match anything and sacrifice a pick in the process I don't think they will.  I guess it depends on what tender they put on him.

Dorsey was the one who brought him in, and it sounds like Cleveland is going away from Dorsey largely because of the off the field problem guys he was bringing in.  "The team did not meet its potential on or off the field" seems like tea leaves pointing to not signing guys who are already on a second chance and just had a minor incident. 

 

If they just don't want him that will change everything but if they want him I'd assume they place at least a second round tender on him and that's the part where I think Cleveland can retain him cheap because I don't think anyone will offer Hunt a sizeable contract AND have to give up a second or more.

I hope you are right, I badly want him out, but not getting my hopes up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, kittenmittens said:

Dorsey was the one who brought him in, and it sounds like Cleveland is going away from Dorsey largely because of the off the field problem guys he was bringing in. 

I'm sure that didn't help Dorsey and his case to retain his GM role with Haslem.  However, it appears ownership has elected to run the organization with a very, very strong analytical bent...at the cost of just about everything else.  Dorsey is an old school GM and that just wasn't a good fit.

One could argue Haslem won't find any good fits because he is consistently inconsistent with his problem solving approach.  One year this, next year that, etc.  Also, based on his track record with TripleJ (intentionally ripping off smaller trucking companies), I'm led to believe he's just not a trustworthy person.  That's one poor combination.  Leads to yes men, short-term fixes, and poor morale.  Sounds like a Factory of Sadness to me.

For Brown's fans I hope that isn't the case, but it appears Cleveland is stuck with a bad apple at owner.  Just like DC is with Big Boy Daniel Snyder and the Jets are with Woody...and the team's records over their time as owners have reflected their leadership and decision making abilities.

Edited by trader jake
Owner name.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The act itself isn't a big deal, however a guy that has a history of making bad choices doesn't seem like this is a good choice.  Nobody has any idea what the Browns told him with regards to this kind of allegation.  They may have told him they have a zero tolerance policy for something like this. 

 

It's a big deal because of his situation and only because of his situation.  Who knows how it will play out......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Joe Bryant changed the title to RB Kareem Hunt, CLE

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
  • Create New...