- Thread starter
- #1
theboardref
thewhite_00 ESPN board
We go through every season and see a list of players getting suspended for getting caught with drug test. Seeing that it was illegal in every state it is understandable. But now, there are two states that have legalized the use. If a student gets caught smoking weed in those states it is technically equivalent to someone getting caught drinking under the age of 21.
Some schools don't punish the use of marijuana as severely as others, and it becomes a point of questioning what will become the way athletes are punished now that it is legal in some states and not illegal in others. Why is it fair that student athletes of one state will not be punished at all while others are forced to sit out for games during the season?
We see LSU having many incidents over the course of the year and having ramifications while Alabama fans say Coach Saban doesn't crack down as harshly on his players. Most that I have heard from claim Coach Saban rather them smoke weed than go out and drink alcohol. So is the punishment for players coming down more to political views than whether the kids are actually doing anything deemed right or wrong?
The NCAA does not punish the athletes for the drug testing, that is up to the programs themselves. But should it be that way? With personal coaches political views affecting how a student is punished and the legalization of marijuana in 2 states, should a higher authority (no pun intended) be making a guideline for schools to go by for punishing or not punishing the athletes?
Then their is the issue of the NCAA becoming so corrupt that is it fair for them to be making the judgement on a matter like this. If smoking weed has been a team related issue, why should they start chiming in now? But how is it fair for no punishment to befall someone purely because of where they live?
All in all, with the legalization of marijuana it rises many issues that have never needed looking into until now. Do we acknowledge these issues head on or ignore them until problems arise?
Some schools don't punish the use of marijuana as severely as others, and it becomes a point of questioning what will become the way athletes are punished now that it is legal in some states and not illegal in others. Why is it fair that student athletes of one state will not be punished at all while others are forced to sit out for games during the season?
We see LSU having many incidents over the course of the year and having ramifications while Alabama fans say Coach Saban doesn't crack down as harshly on his players. Most that I have heard from claim Coach Saban rather them smoke weed than go out and drink alcohol. So is the punishment for players coming down more to political views than whether the kids are actually doing anything deemed right or wrong?
The NCAA does not punish the athletes for the drug testing, that is up to the programs themselves. But should it be that way? With personal coaches political views affecting how a student is punished and the legalization of marijuana in 2 states, should a higher authority (no pun intended) be making a guideline for schools to go by for punishing or not punishing the athletes?
Then their is the issue of the NCAA becoming so corrupt that is it fair for them to be making the judgement on a matter like this. If smoking weed has been a team related issue, why should they start chiming in now? But how is it fair for no punishment to befall someone purely because of where they live?
All in all, with the legalization of marijuana it rises many issues that have never needed looking into until now. Do we acknowledge these issues head on or ignore them until problems arise?