I guess he would

[Sharkinva]

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

And Im cool with that. You are one of the cowboys fans I actually respect ( well except during the weeks when we play). And that doesnt change as far as Im concerned. <---- tea toast.

 

[gkekoa]

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 ?

I don't have outrage over any of those...just like I have no outrage over weed. Those substances are not illegal though. Those substances are not against the rules either. Those substances are not banned by the league either. It is the league's choice.

 

[gkekoa]

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

You are trying to pass the emotion onto me. You are the one blaming the rule and not the individual action. You are the one vested in this because you want people to believe the illegal act you are doing is OK.

 

[gkekoa]

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

I am sure some player's do show up drunk or at least under some effect of alcohol.

No I have never been high. I have also never been drunk. I don't need those things to be happy.

 

[j_y19]

I am sure some player's do show up drunk or at least under some effect of alcohol.

No I have never been high. I have also never been drunk. I don't need those things to be happy.

I figured as much. Not to be critical, but if you have never been high, its hard to understand the effect on you. It greatly slows your reaction time and your motor skills. It also makes it very difficult to concentrate on any one thing to long, or it could make you get lost "deep in thought". In short, if you played football at the NFL level stoned, you would get killed. It would become very apparent you could not play rather quickly. Which means, at best, you would be benched. At worst you couldn't make an NFL roster being a stoner while trying to play. So your claims about guys showing up to games stoned isn't very realistic. Now they might be getting stoned the night before with regularity but that would have little effect on their play the next day. A night out boozing for a player before a game would have a much greater effect (being hungover) than a night out being stoned.

 

[gkekoa]

I figured as much. Not to be critical, but if you have never been high, its hard to understand the effect on you. It greatly slows your reaction time and your motor skills. It also makes it very difficult to concentrate on any one thing to long, or it could make you get lost "deep in thought". In short, if you played football at the NFL level stoned, you would get killed. It would become very apparent you could not play rather quickly. Which means, at best, you would be benched. At worst you couldn't make an NFL roster being a stoner while trying to play. So your claims about guys showing up to games stoned isn't very realistic. Now they might be getting stoned the night before with regularity but that would have little effect on their play the next day. A night out boozing for a player before a game would have a much greater effect (being hungover) than a night out being stoned.

And I think you are discounting the effects on different people. As with alcohol, marijuana affects people differently. The effects you were talking about come in many ranges.

As a matter of fact...read this before telling me it isn't realistic.

https://www.google.com/amp/nypost.c...players-love-getting-high-before-kickoff/amp/

 

[j_y19]

And I think you are discounting the effects on different people. As with alcohol, marijuana affects people differently. The effects you were talking about come in many ranges.

As a matter of fact...read this before telling me it isn't realistic.

https://www.google.com/amp/nypost.c...players-love-getting-high-before-kickoff/amp/

I read it. I agree with 90% of it. The part I don't agree with is the actual playing better while stoned. No doubt it affects people differently. But there is no way I could play better stoned. And it's been my experience that most people who smoke would agree with me. Now maybe that one guy who said he played better thought he did (wouldn't be unusual for someone stoned to have a warped sense of perception), but I highly doubt it. Just commenting from personal experience. Weed enhances some things, but concentration, reaction time and fine motor skills aren't any of them, IMO. It absolutely does help with pain management. I still maintain that if the league stopped testing for it, you would not see some huge increase in players stoned while on the field. You would see a huge increase in players stoned off the field, however.

 

[eaglesnut]

I don't have outrage over any of those...just like I have no outrage over weed. Those substances are not illegal though. Those substances are not against the rules either. Those substances are not banned by the league either. It is the league's choice.

Exactly. Their decision limits the talent on the playing field.

 

[eaglesnut]

You are trying to pass the emotion onto me. You are the one blaming the rule and not the individual action. You are the one vested in this because you want people to believe the illegal act you are doing is OK.

You are really jumping all around here. Some might call it squirming. And now you are trying to frame this your way and make it about me. But what you are missing is I already said it was about me. It's about all of us fans. I want to watch the best players play football. So don't go misconstruing what was said here. The fans are harmed by the league's decision.

 

[eaglesnut]

"Dr. Sue Sisley, M.D., the lead investigator on an FDA-approved cannabis trial study, recounts a recent example of an NFL patient suffering from a rotator-cuff tear that she wound up treating. “Nothing gave him relief — including opioids,” she says. “He was on the bench because he was nonfunctional on the field. Side effects from the medicine had him so sedated that it was literally dangerous for him to play. He was frustrated and lost his position and lost credibility. He tried cannabis and actually got back in the game. He is currently playing now. That is a common scenario.”

 

[gkekoa]

I read it. I agree with 90% of it. The part I don't agree with is the actual playing better while stoned. No doubt it affects people differently. But there is no way I could play better stoned. And it's been my experience that most people who smoke would agree with me. Now maybe that one guy who said he played better thought he did (wouldn't be unusual for someone stoned to have a warped sense of perception), but I highly doubt it. Just commenting from personal experience. Weed enhances some things, but concentration, reaction time and fine motor skills aren't any of them, IMO. It absolutely does help with pain management. I still maintain that if the league stopped testing for it, you would not see some huge increase in players stoned while on the field. You would see a huge increase in players stoned off the field, however.

I totally agree that no professional athlete will play better stoned. I just wanted to show you players do show up stoned, especially being you said it was unrealistic to think they would.

I agree weed can help with pain management, as can other things.

I believe there would be an increase of people showing up under the influence if legalized in the league.

 

[gkekoa]

Exactly. Their decision limits the talent on the playing field.

No...the player's choosing to break the rules limits the talent on the field.

You are really jumping all around here. Some might call it squirming. And now you are trying to frame this your way and make it about me. But what you are missing is I already said it was about me. It's about all of us fans. I want to watch the best players play football. So don't go misconstruing what was said here. The fans are harmed by the league's decision.

I am not jumping at all. The fans are not harmed by not having Gordon play football. The world goes on without him, just as it would go on without you.

"Dr. Sue Sisley, M.D., the lead investigator on an FDA-approved cannabis trial study, recounts a recent example of an NFL patient suffering from a rotator-cuff tear that she wound up treating. “Nothing gave him relief — including opioids,” she says. “He was on the bench because he was nonfunctional on the field. Side effects from the medicine had him so sedated that it was literally dangerous for him to play. He was frustrated and lost his position and lost credibility. He tried cannabis and actually got back in the game. He is currently playing now. That is a common scenario.”

And you still miss the point. I don't dispute there are benefits to medical marijuana. The league has the right to set the rules. There are medical benefits to steroids as well. Should we legalize those in the game?

 

[eaglesnut]

No...the player's choosing to break the rules limits the talent on the field.

The NFL gets to decide whether that is true or not. Hence it's the NFL's decision to exclude a talent pool from its fields.

I am not jumping at all. The fans are not harmed by not having Gordon play football. The world goes on without him, just as it would go on without you.

Of course it goes on, that's not really much of a point by you. It goes on a little bit worse. Gordon is a talent worth watching. Yet you cling to denial.

And you still miss the point. I don't dispute there are benefits to medical marijuana. The league has the right to set the rules. There are medical benefits to steroids as well. Should we legalize those in the game?

Your squirming has turned to flailing. Steroids? Heh, now maybe marijuana does have benefit? But you were so sure of yourself earlier when you said the opposite!! You really can't make up your mind, you are just emotionally against it and will cling to any attack on it no matter how contradictory you become. Weak.

 

[Sharkinva]

I totally agree that no professional athlete will play better stoned. I just wanted to show you players do show up stoned, especially being you said it was unrealistic to think they would.

I agree weed can help with pain management, as can other things.

I believe there would be an increase of people showing up under the influence if legalized in the league.

But thats the players choice. And it would be the leagues choice on exactly how to deal with that. The whole idea that weed is some gate way addictive substance has been basically disproved. The reason it is still illegal is because the government is still trying to figure out the best way to get their cut of the cash flow. No one can force you to toke up, and unless some one is directly causing harm to you or others because they were high, the government, you, me or any one else should not within reason be able to tell people what they are allowed to do with their bodies in their free time. Anymore than they should be able to tell you what god to follow, or what TV shows to watch. So as long as players are not walking onto the field stoned, driving stoned.... it makes no sense to deny one of the best NATURAL pain management substances on the planet because 70 years ago some one said.... this is a bad thing for you. And thats what it comes down to. At some point you were told.. this is bad. You took that as gospel, which is fine and its your right. But when you start making laws and suppressing data and research for monetary reasons any sane individual SHOULD start to question the real motives behind the societal stance at least when it comes to alot of these things the government has deemed bad.

Its funny if you look back at the history of this country and figure out, they tried this with alcohol and finally came to the realization, it COST money to enforce these laws, where as the country MAKES money by alcohol being legal. Within the next 10-15 years tops it will be legal to smoke, eat or vape THC recreationally, as well as for things like pain management and cancer treatment.

 

[gkekoa]

The NFL gets to decide whether that is true or not. Hence it's the NFL's decision to exclude a talent pool from its fields.



Of course it goes on, that's not really much of a point by you. It goes on a little bit worse. Gordon is a talent worth watching. Yet you cling to denial.



Your squirming has turned to flailing. Steroids? Heh, now maybe marijuana does have benefit? But you were so sure of yourself earlier when you said the opposite!! You really can't make up your mind, you are just emotionally against it and will cling to any attack on it no matter how contradictory you become. Weak.

Talent alone isn't what makes the NFL entertainment. The NFL has determined at this point allowing marijuana negatively impacts the business. A rule is made and enforcement of the rule is required. So it is the player's choice.

Is it worse as a whole? Not at all. The NFL would be no better by allowing cannabis and would likely be worse.

Are you a fucking moron? When did I ever say there was no medical benefit to marijuana? As with most people who like the Eagles, you can't comprehend the written word and like to insert statements that were never made.

Feel free to go back crying to the Eagles board. I am done with you.

 

[gkekoa]

But thats the players choice. And it would be the leagues choice on exactly how to deal with that. The whole idea that weed is some gate way addictive substance has been basically disproved. The reason it is still illegal is because the government is still trying to figure out the best way to get their cut of the cash flow. No one can force you to toke up, and unless some one is directly causing harm to you or others because they were high, the government, you, me or any one else should not within reason be able to tell people what they are allowed to do with their bodies in their free time. Anymore than they should be able to tell you what god to follow, or what TV shows to watch. So as long as players are not walking onto the field stoned, driving stoned.... it makes no sense to deny one of the best NATURAL pain management substances on the planet because 70 years ago some one said.... this is a bad thing for you. And thats what it comes down to. At some point you were told.. this is bad. You took that as gospel, which is fine and its your right. But when you start making laws and suppressing data and research for monetary reasons any sane individual SHOULD start to question the real motives behind the societal stance at least when it comes to alot of these things the government has deemed bad.

Its funny if you look back at the history of this country and figure out, they tried this with alcohol and finally came to the realization, it COST money to enforce these laws, where as the country MAKES money by alcohol being legal. Within the next 10-15 years tops it will be legal to smoke, eat or vape THC recreationally, as well as for things like pain management and cancer treatment.

It really hasn't been disproved that weed is addictive or a gateway drug but not the point.

I agree, if the league said it is fine, it would be the choice of the players. At this moment it isn't authorized by the league so it is the choice of the players to break the rules.

It is your opinion the government is just trying to figure out how to get their cut. It is also your opinion the government is suppressing data. And you are entitled to your opinion.

You seem to believe I don't think it will be legal. I absolutely believe it will. I also believe it should be just like I believe cocaine should be legal. I do however believe any consequence of taking these substances should be faced by the individual alone, without tax payer money. And if any crime is committed under the influence should be dealt with very harshly.

 

[eaglesnut]

Talent alone isn't what makes the NFL entertainment. The NFL has determined at this point allowing marijuana negatively impacts the business. A rule is made and enforcement of the rule is required. So it is the player's choice.

Is it worse as a whole? Not at all. The NFL would be no better by allowing cannabis and would likely be worse.

Are you a fucking moron? When did I ever say there was no medical benefit to marijuana? As with most people who like the Eagles, you can't comprehend the written word and like to insert statements that were never made.

Feel free to go back crying to the Eagles board. I am done with you.

You said there was no benefit for the player. And then you tried to compare it to steroids.

But you are such an emotional little drama queen you can't even explain yourself or your position.

 

[gkekoa]

You said there was no benefit for the player. And then you tried to compare it to steroids.

But you are such an emotional little drama queen you can't even explain yourself or your position.

Playing benefit...none. Medical benefits, yes.

There are also medical benefits to steroids, thus the comparison. Eagles fans are very slow.

 

[eaglesnut]

Playing benefit...none. Medical benefits, yes.

And so the league withholds those medical benefits from the players denying them appropriate medicine for what ails them. This is what you have been reduced to. Arguing that medical benefits should be denied from the players because some might smoke before games otherwise.

 

[skinsdad62]

for the love of god if you have a job and its rules state ytou cant use a certain substance then its up to the indiviual to comply . the NFL has every right to set up conditions for emplaoyment as does any other business. now its fair to argue about a policy change but the NFL can weigh the prons/ cons and decide from there what is best for the brand