Broncos Hero is a Cheater....

[Broncos6482]

That is the test Von failed. So he is right it wasn't a suspension for PED's.

Which has been my only point the entire time.

 

[Oldschool739]

That's what the NFL said though, so...

 

[Rockinkuwait]

If he peed once and then had to pee again shortly after then he had to drink water in between. That will dilute it.

Just looking up on what you would realistically need to do to get busted here.

True, the WHO says below 30 mg/dl creatinine concentration is diluted, many drug tests use 35. NFL goes with under 20 for creatinine concentration in urine which is pretty weak (unless you are Jay Cutler). I've read that is the equivalent of drinking 3-4 quarts of water more than what you would in an average day to rehydrate. So if you pissed recently, and then heard you had to take a sample, and drank around a full gallon of water, then you could risk giving a dilute sample.

Now remember a dilute sample ISN'T a suspension. But they test your sample to the "limits of detection" so instead of being able to have cocaine in your system, but not enough to test positive, if you have it in your system, that's a dilute positive.

Positive or negative you enter stage 1 of the process if you are not in the program (tested more often, get help if needed).

But lets say Von, who was already in the intervention program, got a dilute negative. He is warned. That's it.





If his next sample is ALSO dilute negative then that is considered a positive. If it is a dilute positive, then he moves up to the next stage immediately.

So to be suspended for a diluted negative sample, Von would have had to either given a diluted sample that came back negative for drugs, gotten a warning and then given a 2nd diluted sample on his next test.

Or given a diluted sample where drugs were detected.

 

[NWPATSFAN]

I'm not debating that he tried to cheat the test. He did, and I agree, that's cheating. What I am debating is Ninersickness' baseless accusation that he used PEDs. He did not, it was substance abuse, most likely marijuana.

So yeah, I don't see how a pot and drug test cheating in 2013 invalidates what the Broncos did in 2015. I mean, if you really want to invalidate the Broncos 2015 season because of PEDs, you could use Derek Wolfe's 4 game suspension to begin the year.

Or Peyton? Ooops I mean his wife.

 

[NWPATSFAN]

The actual definition of cheating is "act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game or examination"

That's it, you can say you don't care whether it gives you an unfair advantage or not, but then the word you are looking for is NOT cheating, it is rulebreaking. The entire reason cheating is it's own word, is that it is a specific type of rule-breaking that gives you an advantage.

Take it this way. Who cheated on their math test?

1. Student A copies the answers off of another student who has straight A's in the class.
2. Student B is found to have alcohol in their bookbag and kicked out of class.

Both kicked out of the test and both receive a 0 score. Student A cheated on his math test. Student B broke a rule of the school but did not cheat on the test.

To me, cheating is trying to gain an unfair advantage (the actual definition of it). If you break the off-field conduct rules, and get suspended, I don't consider that cheating at football. So for me, Adrian Peterson didn't cheat at football when he beat his kid. That action had zero effect on the Vikings performance.

Cherry picking not allowed that's cheating. Definition #2. Avoid (something undesirable) by luck or skill. [Avoid, Escape, Evade, Elude].

 

[Rockinkuwait]

Cherry picking not allowed that's cheating. Definition #2. Avoid (something undesirable) by luck or skill. [Avoid, Escape, Evade, Elude].

That's the definition of the word. Straight from the dictionary. Take it up with the English language if you want to change what words mean.

 

[NWPATSFAN]

That's the definition of the word. Straight from the dictionary. Take it up with the English language if you want to change what words mean.

Exactly. So what your opinion is what we should take? You used the first definition. By definition he cheated. No more needs to be said. Unless you want to have the English language changed. Sorry life is pretty black and white until people try to over complicate it.

 

[Rockinkuwait]

You literally said

"it's cheating whether it gives you an unfair advantage or not."


I showed you the definition where yes, unfairly gaining an advantage is a mandatory part of the definition of the word in the English language.

You have to do a complete 180 with the definition to make it fit your own version of the English language.

 

[Rockinkuwait]

Exactly. So what your opinion is what we should take? You used the first definition. By definition he cheated. No more needs to be said. Unless you want to have the English language changed. Sorry life is pretty black and white until people try to over complicate it.

What opinion??? It's a fucking language and the definition of the word says exactly the opposite of your opinion of what you think it should mean instead. If you decide to call your shoes a hat, and call your dog a cat, that isn't about opinion.

 

[NWPATSFAN]

What opinion??? It's a fucking language and the definition of the word says exactly the opposite of your opinion of what you think it should mean instead. If you decide to call your shoes a hat, and call your dog a cat, that isn't about opinion.

Wow awfully testy just because you're wrong on this. You gave an opinion that only the definition of the word cheat you chose applied. By definition he evaded, avoided, aluded the original drug test. He cheated bottom line. Just admit it and let's move on. Do you really want to continue arguing semantics and the dictionary? I personally don't.

 

[Rockinkuwait]

Wow awfully testy just because you're wrong on this. You gave an opinion that only the definition of the word cheat you chose applied. By definition he evaded, avoided, aluded the original drug test. He cheated bottom line. Just admit it and let's move on. Do you really want to continue arguing semantics and the dictionary? I personally don't.

I said

"Substance abuse... Not cheating.

Intentionally trying to hide substance abuse so you can be active in games you should not be playing in... Cheating. "

And you asked why I said just smoking pot isn't cheating.

Now it seems you are saying the exact same thing I did a page ago.

 

[Rockinkuwait]

You are so lost on the english language

YOU ARE ARGUING WITH ME WHEN I SAID VON MILLER WAS A CHEATER BECAUSE HE TRIED TO COVER UP HIS DRUG TEST.

 

[NWPATSFAN]

I said

"Substance abuse... Not cheating.

Intentionally trying to hide substance abuse so you can be active in games you should not be playing in... Cheating. "

And you asked why I said just smoking pot isn't cheating.

Now it seems you are saying the exact same thing I did a page ago.

To begin with we are debating two unknowns. 1. Was it even pot? We don't know. 2. Some experts claim marijuana for some does enhance their awareness, masks pain, increase lung health and decrease anxiety to name just a few. These are not my opinions but those of medical marijuana advocates and health professionals. I personally think it's bs. So similar to Seadderal it IMHO should be viewed as a performance enhancer for some individuals.
Thus in my original post I asked you "whether it gives you an unfair advantage or not". I didn't want this to become a 420 advocate thread because I for one am not for it. If the government wants to legalize good for them. I think there may be benefits to the government by doing that. But, that's a whole different thread.

 

[Oldschool739]

Or Peyton? Ooops I mean his wife.

Peyton took the phrase Gitty Up, literally....

 

[Rockinkuwait]

To begin with we are debating two unknowns. 1. Was it even pot? We don't know. 2. Some experts claim marijuana for some does enhance their awareness, masks pain, increase lung health and decrease anxiety to name just a few. These are not my opinions but those of medical marijuana advocates and health professionals. I personally think it's bs. So similar to Seadderal it IMHO should be viewed as a performance enhancer for some individuals.
Thus in my original post I asked you "whether it gives you an unfair advantage or not". I didn't want this to become a 420 advocate thread because I for one am not for it. If the government wants to legalize good for them. I think there may be benefits to the government by doing that. But, that's a whole different thread.

I am not debating those two things with you.

1. already addressed when I said "As for the "most likely pot" for failing a drug test, that kind of falls in the "most likely a tainted supplement" for failing a PED test. NFL doesn't give out that info."




2. already addressed when I said "that is where you could make the case that smoking pot is cheating. Saying it gives you a benefit over the legal drugs available."... catch up to the party here bud.


And I agree with your exact belief that I don't think pot makes you a better football player.

I think we are truly exactly on the same page except for me, Cheating has to give you an unfair advantage

That is why I believe doing pot and getting caught isn't cheating, covering up pot use to avoid a 4 game suspension when tested is.



Now the only part of what you said that I disagree with is " It's against NFL rules. Thus it's cheating whether it gives you an unfair advantage or not. Breaking a rule = cheating."



And I disagree 100% with that.

Adrian Peterson broke a rule by beating his kid.

Ray Rice broke a rule by beating his fiance.

Jalen Strong broke a rule by having marijuana in his car.

Had Deangelo Williams wore pink all season for breast cancer he would have broken a rule.

Had Jay Cutler wore Pat Tillmans number all year he would have broken a rule.

Dez Bryant missing curfew meant he broke a rule.

Marshawn Lynch skipping media days broke a rule.

Kam Chancellor skipping mandatory camp days broke a rule.

All were punished via suspensions or fines for their cheating. Because Cheating = breaking a rule.



You believe if Tom Brady decides to skip a day of mandatory mini-camp that makes him a cheater. The rules say he has to be there. He wasn't. He broke a rule. Rulebreaking = CHEATING. I disagree wholeheartedly that him doing that makes him a cheater.

I don't consider all rulebreakers cheaters. I believe you have to gain an advantage in the game for that rulebreaking to also be cheating in football. That's the definition, not the semantics of the definition it's the basis of the word itself existing and not just having "rule-breaking" as the only word for that in the english language. The advantage gained is literally why the word exists. And I'd fully agree that I consider Von Miller breaking the rules to try and hide his urine results is cheating. Wes Welker wearing an baseball cap with his energy bar is not. Both broke rules. Both are not acts of cheating.


Cheating always involves breaking the rules.

Breaking the rules does not always involve cheating.

Just like every monkey is an animal, but not every animal is a monkey.

 

[Brees#1]

0-6 start?

 

[NWPATSFAN]

I am not debating those two things with you.

1. already addressed when I said "As for the "most likely pot" for failing a drug test, that kind of falls in the "most likely a tainted supplement" for failing a PED test. NFL doesn't give out that info."




2. already addressed when I said "that is where you could make the case that smoking pot is cheating. Saying it gives you a benefit over the legal drugs available."... catch up to the party here bud.


And I agree with your exact belief that I don't think pot makes you a better football player.

I think we are truly exactly on the same page except for me, Cheating has to give you an unfair advantage

That is why I believe doing pot and getting caught isn't cheating, covering up pot use to avoid a 4 game suspension when tested is.



Now the only part of what you said that I disagree with is " It's against NFL rules. Thus it's cheating whether it gives you an unfair advantage or not. Breaking a rule = cheating."



And I disagree 100% with that.

Adrian Peterson broke a rule by beating his kid.

Ray Rice broke a rule by beating his fiance.

Jalen Strong broke a rule by having marijuana in his car.

Had Deangelo Williams wore pink all season for breast cancer he would have broken a rule.

Had Jay Cutler wore Pat Tillmans number all year he would have broken a rule.

Dez Bryant missing curfew meant he broke a rule.

Marshawn Lynch skipping media days broke a rule.

Kam Chancellor skipping mandatory camp days broke a rule.

All were punished via suspensions or fines for their cheating. Because Cheating = breaking a rule.



You believe if Tom Brady decides to skip a day of mandatory mini-camp that makes him a cheater. The rules say he has to be there. He wasn't. He broke a rule. Rulebreaking = CHEATING. I disagree wholeheartedly that him doing that makes him a cheater.

I don't consider all rulebreakers cheaters. I believe you have to gain an advantage in the game for that rulebreaking to also be cheating in football. That's the definition, not the semantics of the definition it's the basis of the word itself existing and not just having "rule-breaking" as the only word for that in the english language. The advantage gained is literally why the word exists. And I'd fully agree that I consider Von Miller breaking the rules to try and hide his urine results is cheating. Wes Welker wearing an baseball cap with his energy bar is not. Both broke rules. Both are not acts of cheating.


Cheating always involves breaking the rules.

Breaking the rules does not always involve cheating.

Just like every monkey is an animal, but not every animal is a monkey.

We'll just have to disagree on the semantics of this. IMHO Miller cheated every player who has chosen not to take an illegal substance. Whether it's an illegal substance or a PED by NFL definition. He did something that was against the rules of the NFL. A rule that others have not. In the opinion of some marijuana may give you an unfair advantage.

 

[Rockinkuwait]

We'll just have to disagree on the semantics of this. IMHO Miller cheated every player who has chosen not to take an illegal substance. Whether it's an illegal substance or a PED by NFL definition. He did something that was against the rules of the NFL. A rule that others have not. In the opinion of some marijuana may give you an unfair advantage.

No, I believe he cheated not because he smoked pot, but because he tried to cheat the test.

You know what rule Von Miller breaks the most in the NFL? The Bronco's have a rule and fines for farting in meetings. He's their most fined rule breaker. Cheater?

Now here's where you may have a point. Put in any player here, this isn't anti-patriots, but he's the example that stands out to me.

The two excerpt policies the NFL has that they don't say affects the performance of the game is the conduct and the recreational drug policies. The PED policy specifically states using those can give you an unfair benefit in the game.

Aaron Hernandez smoked pot while in the NFL. He'd stop when he was about to be tested and pass his test. But technically he played games when he was doing something that should have had him suspended. Cheating right?

So that means had Ray Rice waited until they got to the room to hit his fiance, and no one ever told anyone he would be a cheater because he did something that should have earned him a suspension but wasn't caught. I can't make that logical leap.

I can't say Aaron Hernandez and Rae Carruth murdering people is an example of cheating in the NFL. I can't say Michael Vick dogfighting is cheating in the NFL.

I don't believe pot gives you an advantage playing. If you believe it does, then sure, to you, pot use is a PED (the FDA, NFL, and NFLPA all don't and until the NFL makes it one, it isn't in the context of their own rules). If you believe that, I am fine with you believing pot use is cheating. If I believed that I would believe it was cheating as well.







Here. Explain these three situations as cheating to me, because I can't see it.

Plaxico Burress shooting himself in the leg.
Don Mattingly not cutting his mullet.
Terrence Knighton showing up for camp overweight.

All broke rules. Explain how you feel "cheater" is a fair label for those players actions (besides pot roast cheating on his diet lol)?

 

[Rockinkuwait]

And I guess even if you believe pot gives you an advantage, the rules don't. If it is about the rules, well they say pot is not a performance enhancer. You can debate whether or not you think it is, but if it isn't in the rulebook as a performance enhancer, it doesn't matter does it?

Someone can debate whether what the pats did against the Ravens was unfair with their shifting of players in the post-season a few years ago, or the Brady tuck play, but it wasn't against the rules in the NFL at the time, so to me, that isn't cheating to win football. If you want to say you believe it is even though the rules say it isn't, I'd disagree no matter who's team it is about.

 

[NWPATSFAN]

And I guess even if you believe pot gives you an advantage, the rules don't. If it is about the rules, well they say pot is not a performance enhancer. You can debate whether or not you think it is, but if it isn't in the rulebook as a performance enhancer, it doesn't matter does it?

Someone can debate whether what the pats did against the Ravens was unfair with their shifting of players in the post-season a few years ago, or the Brady tuck play, but it wasn't against the rules in the NFL at the time, so to me, that isn't cheating to win football. If you want to say you believe it is even though the rules say it isn't, I'd disagree no matter who's team it is about.

You're all over the place making unfair comparisons.

Let's try this again. Keep in mind all the dictionary definitions of cheating.
Is it against the rules/by laws to smoke pot in the NFL? If you don't follow the rules/by laws while playing a game you're cheating.

You're really starting to reach now. NE elligible/inelligble receivers was NOT against any rule or by law. It was legal.

You can continue to come up with another 100 comparisons that aren't relevant and it will still not sway my opinion.