I guess he would

[gkekoa]

You are pretending that's true and I can see that you are very firmly and emotionally invested in that pretense.

Not at all. If you think weed doesn't hurt a player's performance, then you are delusional.

 

[eaglesnut]

Not at all. If you think weed doesn't hurt a player's performance, then you are delusional.

The best RB in the league smoked weed. Anyway, you are completely conflating two different things now - being high during a game and having weed in your system during a test. These piss tests don't test whether or not a guy is high for a game. There are guys who are high during games that you have no clue about. The policy is ridiculous on a variety of fronts.

 

[gkekoa]

The best RB in the league smoked weed. Anyway, you are completely conflating two different things now - being high during a game and having weed in your system during a test. These piss tests don't test whether or not a guy is high for a game. There are guys who are high during games that you have no clue about. The policy is ridiculous on a variety of fronts.

Did I say player's are high during games? If you made it legal, then they will be high during games.

 

[eaglesnut]

Did I say player's are high during games? If you made it legal, then they will be high during games.

Nope, because that isn't what we were talking about, but you tried to make a point about it anyway. You don't want players to be able to smoke after games for some reason you still haven't figured out how to articulate. You are certainly emotionally against it, but your brain hasn't caught up to your feelings.

 

[Krusheasy]

Not at all. If you think weed doesn't hurt a player's performance, then you are delusional.

this comes from your years of experience i assume ?

 

[gkekoa]

Nope, because that isn't what we were talking about, but you tried to make a point about it anyway. You don't want players to be able to smoke after games for some reason you still haven't figured out how to articulate. You are certainly emotionally against it, but your brain hasn't caught up to your feelings.

I never tried to make that a point. You stated it was my point. If the league allows weed, then players will show up high. I have articulated my point very well...the problem is your comprehension. You like to add meaning to words that were never written.

My feelings on the matter aren't even relevant. I have already stated I don't care what people do at home...I have defended the league's right to make rules for their employees to abide by.

 

[gkekoa]

this comes from your years of experience i assume ?

Nope. It comes from reading about the effects of marijuana. I am smart enough to not need an experience to know it is bad.

 

[Krusheasy]

Nope. It comes from reading about the effects of marijuana. I am smart enough to not need an experience to know it is bad.

exactly ...

drinking has adverse affects. How about nicotine, or caffeine or Viagra .... or a million other substances the pharmaceutical companies promote .... they come with pages of warnings.

Where is your outrage ?

 

[Breed]

It is only a dumb policy if it costs the league money.

It is a completely unnecessary policy. That has no real benefit to or for anyone. Does than make it dumb? No, not necessarily, but it certainly is archaic and from where I sit. Serves no real vantage point for anyone.

The NFL could be a front-runner of sorts and proclaim that weed will no longer be tested for. As everybody and their mama already knows with the exception of reptec. That weed does not provide any physical or mental edge for the player using it.

 

[Manster7588]

Yeah, worse ones. That's the point.

I don't care about players having money or making money, I care about the fans getting to watch the best players. Only one thing has to happen for that to be possible. The league only needs to change its worthless policy.

There's plenty of entertainers out there just waiting for their break, the void will be filled. Besides last I checked actors and singers aren't in a league with drug regulations.
I use to have a very high tolerance for alcohol, the .08 had no effect on my abilities however if I were caught driving I'd get a DUI. It would be my fault not the fault of the law.

 

[Breed]

You mention the quality of the product on the field. If you had a league of dopers, the product would be far less than a single player suspension.

The league is already filled with players who smoke weed.

Which team would be more doped up?

A team where all 53 players are high from the NFL banned substance, marijuana. Or a team where all 53 players are high from the legally NFL approved substance of oxycotin?

Even moreso than expanding the game schedule to 18 reg season games and playing games on Thursday nights. This issue more than any other shows that owners don't give a nasty, bloody fuck about players. Which is why the NFLPA or whoever need to come at this situation from a different angle. A monetary angle. The owners will at least listen to that.

 

[Manster7588]

The league is already filled with players who smoke weed.

Which team would be more doped up?

A team where all 53 players are high from the NFL banned substance, marijuana. Or a team where all 53 players are high from the legally NFL approved substance of oxycotin?

Even moreso than expanding the game schedule to 18 reg season games and playing games on Thursday nights. This issue more than any other shows that owners don't give a nasty, bloody fuck about players. Which is why the NFLPA or whoever need to come at this situation from a different angle. A monetary angle. The owners will at least listen to that.

Agree, anyone who thinks the few suspended players are the only weed smokers are kidding themselves.
I'm anti weed but if the league stopped testing for it I'd accept the rule. Current problem would be some teams would have players arested by law enforcement, while other teams (Denver /Seattle) wouldn't.
I'm thinking the league will continue its weed ban until either all states with an NFL team legalizes it or the feds do.

 

[Sharkinva]

Did I say player's are high during games? If you made it legal, then they will be high during games.

Thats your assumption. And as some one who is obviously of the mind that the government should be able to tell people what they are allowed to do with their bodies.... well as long as the government agrees with your particular stance that is.

 

[Manster7588]

Thats your assumption. And as some one who is obviously of the mind that the government should be able to tell people what they are allowed to do with their bodies.... well as long as the government agrees with your particular stance that is.

Should cocaine be legal? No I'm not saying weed and cocaine are equal, but by your statement I take it you think the gov shouldn't controll any drug.

 

[Sharkinva]

Should cocaine be legal? No I'm not saying weed and cocaine are equal, but by your statement I take it you think the gov shouldn't controll any drug.

Thats the thing, cocaine IS legal, as long as you get it from a pharmacy and the government manages to get their cut. My thinking is, the government could care less about our health as long as they get their cut in the form of taxes.

 

[j_y19]

I never tried to make that a point. You stated it was my point. If the league allows weed, then players will show up high. I have articulated my point very well...the problem is your comprehension. You like to add meaning to words that were never written.

My feelings on the matter aren't even relevant. I have already stated I don't care what people do at home...I have defended the league's right to make rules for their employees to abide by.

Why are you so convinced players will show up stoned to games? They don't show up drunk today. Have you ever been high?

 

[Manster7588]

Thats the thing, cocaine IS legal, as long as you get it from a pharmacy and the government manages to get their cut. My thinking is, the government could care less about our health as long as they get their cut in the form of taxes.

If I'm not mistaken cocaine can only be administered under direct supervision of a doctor, you cannot go to the local CVS and pick up a line or two.
If the feds were only out for $$ wouldn't tgey have already legalized weed.

Now back to your statement. "And as some one who is obviously of the mind that the government should be able to tell people what they are allowed to do with their bodies."
Should law enforcement stop fighting cocaine, meth, crack etc?

 

[skinsdad62]

And your fans would lose. What if all entertainers were tested for weed and not allowed to entertain us?

no they would not its called condition of employment and its a choice

 

[Sharkinva]

If I'm not mistaken cocaine can only be administered under direct supervision of a doctor, you cannot go to the local CVS and pick up a line or two.
If the feds were only out for $$ wouldn't tgey have already legalized weed.

Now back to your starement. "And as some one who is obviously of the mind that the government should be able to tell people what they are allowed to do with their bodies."
Should law enforcement stop fighting cocaine, meth, crack etc?

As for point #1...

The only reason Weed is illegal at this point is, the government is still trying to find out a way to control it and get their cut. Washington state, Colorado and a few other states have legalized it, the government is getting their cut, and they are fine with it. Cocaine is refined into a number of prescription drugs. Again the government can control its distribution and get their cut, so they have no problem if a doctor gives it to you and you become addicted. As long as they get their cut.


As for point #2...

The Government has been losing the war on drugs from the moment it started. All we have gotten out of it is BILLIONS in wasted tax payer money, and things like the Russian Mafia, The South American Cartels, and countless street gangs that traffic this stuff because you can make alot more money providing an illegal service.

Now I will add to this. If they really want to win the war on drugs, tax the living shit out of it. Make things like driving under the influence (of any substance that hampers judgment or makes one a danger) punishable by jail time no exceptions. Make sale and distribution without a license, or paying taxes as stiff a penalty as they make tax evasion.

Treat it just like cigarettes or alcohol. Problem solved. And if some one is stupid enough to over dose in the privacy of their own home without doing harm to others in the process.... well the world is a bit over populated at the moment any way.

 

[Manster7588]

As for point #1...

The only reason Weed is illegal at this point is, the government is still trying to find out a way to control it and get their cut. Washington state, Colorado and a few other states have legalized it, the government is getting their cut, and they are fine with it. Cocaine is refined into a number of prescription drugs. Again the government can control its distribution and get their cut, so they have no problem if a doctor gives it to you and you become addicted. As long as they get their cut.


As for point #2...

The Government has been losing the war on drugs from the moment it started. All we have gotten out of it is BILLIONS in wasted tax payer money, and things like the Russian Mafia, The South American Cartels, and countless street gangs that traffic this stuff because you can make alot more money providing an illegal service.

Now I will add to this. If they really want to win the war on drugs, tax the living shit out of it. Make things like driving under the influence (of any substance that hampers judgment or makes one a danger) punishable by jail time no exceptions. Make sale and distribution without a license, or paying taxes as stiff a penalty as they make tax evasion.

Treat it just like cigarettes or alcohol. Problem solved. And if some one is stupid enough to over dose in the privacy of their own home without doing harm to others in the process.... well the world is a bit over populated at the moment any way.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.