Ken Gargett Posted January 27, 2014 Posted January 27, 2014 i am not taking either side here but curious as to thoughts. as i understand it, and please correct me if i am wrong, the seahawks have had a player - browner - suspended for 12 months for drug offences. i gather his second offence and that it was simply for marijuana and not for any performance enhancing drug. fair enough. but browner comes from a state where i understand that marijuana is legal. so the NFL can override state laws? as i say, taking no sides and i am sure that there is more here than i know about. but it all seems a curious situation. anyone able to shed more light?
Bartolomeo Posted January 27, 2014 Posted January 27, 2014 Good program on HBO right now that discusses this topic currently, its on the Real Sports w Bryant Gumbel
Ken Gargett Posted January 27, 2014 Author Posted January 27, 2014 Good program on HBO right now that discusses this topic currently, its on the Real Sports w Bryant Gumbel let us know what they decide. bit out of my range.
Fuzz Posted January 27, 2014 Posted January 27, 2014 Just because a drug may be legal, doesn't necessarily mean a sports code will accept it's use by players.
NastyPirate Posted January 27, 2014 Posted January 27, 2014 One of three things may apply here; 1.) His substance abuse was BEFORE it was legal in Washington State. 2.) State law says that employers have the right to require drug tests as a condition of continued employment. 3.) His contract was signed before the new law took effect, thereby requiring him, by contract, to abstain. As one who lives in Washington, the Feds have taken a hands-off approach to the enforcement of Federal marijuana laws here, but I suspect that the Seahawks and the NFL have a requirement that players remain drug-free in any State (at this point, Colorado and Washington) that have laws that allow citizens to legally smoke. 1
Ken Gargett Posted January 27, 2014 Author Posted January 27, 2014 agree with all that. it was more to find out if it is an issue i assumed, but did not know, it was pre legalisation. it might be interesting if a player was banned post legalisation and challenged it in court - restraint of trade etc. i suspect that the nfl could insist on any player taking part in their comp signing appropriate forms which allow the bans. but i'm not up with the relevant laws.
anacostiakat Posted January 27, 2014 Posted January 27, 2014 I think the nfl will cling to the fed law and ignore state laws as it creates a patchwork of enforcement.
madandana Posted January 27, 2014 Posted January 27, 2014 Good point Ken. It's interesting here in the US. 20 years ago pot was "the devils weed" but now is becoming accepted and legal accross the country.
Dozerhead Posted January 27, 2014 Posted January 27, 2014 Good program on HBO right now that discusses this topic currently, its on the Real Sports w Bryant Gumbel I saw that story over the weekend. I think that poses a bigger conflict for the NFL. If marijuana is shown to reduce inflammation of the brain following traumatic brain injury (TBI), such as concussions, then that will put the NFL in a precarious situation in regards to its substance abuse policy/program. It's all speculation now, but would they modify it or maintain the status quo? They would have to give careful thought to the issue especially given recent legal action taken by some of the former players and the league itself trying to reduce number of head injuries in the game. On a side note, the NFL only tests for illegal substances, such as marijuana and cocaine, during a 3 month period leading up to the season (the PED testing schedule is different). You would have to be a colossal dunce to pop since the players know exactly when the testing period is, but some players just can't help themselves. Once you pop, then it can be random throughout the year once a player is in the substance abuse program.
poisonowns Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 I was under the impression that the suspension was for adderall. Bruce Irvin, Walter Thurmond, Winston Guy, John Moffitt all also were suspended for PEDs on Seattle in the past couple seasons. Richard Sherman's was overturned because they concluded the method for collecting his urine sample was flawed. Consider them dunces. Go Seadderall Seahawks!
poisonowns Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 Also, my understanding is that the NFL as a company has rules similar to other companies that fire or suspend employees for failing drug tests. Right now what governs players living in those states from smoking marijuana is company policy. 1
PaulP Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 Good point Ken. It's interesting here in the US. 20 years ago pot was "the devils weed" but now is becoming accepted and legal accross the country. Only legal for recreational use in Colorado and Washington.
stillinger Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 Let em do it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
anacostiakat Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 Yea but I have to conclude that company policy is based on that fact that there is a federal law against it. What is driving the decriminalization leading to legalization is tax revenue to some degree. Just like speeding cameras placed on the down side of a hill. Personally I have no problem with legalizing it. 1
stargazer14 Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 Your work doesnt want you coming in drunk, or stoned, be it legal or not. NFL is a job, you get paid well, lay off the weed for a few years. now, where did i leave my bong........ 1
poisonowns Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 Yea but I have to conclude that company policy is based on that fact that there is a federal law against it. What is driving the decriminalization leading to legalization is tax revenue to some degree. Just like speeding cameras placed on the down side of a hill. Personally I have no problem with legalizing it. True, but just like any company's policies and procedures, someone has to take the time to evaluate them prior to making any changes. Lets not forget a group of 50-65 year old owners will probably have to vote on it too. Who knows maybe it'll change within the next couple of years. Alcohol is legal and I'm sure plenty of guys drink after games and in the off season. Luckily for the players that want to smoke weed the NFL is much more open to considering change than Major League Baseball. NFL could start allowing marijuana and baseball may not change their rules for 30 more years.
galtline Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 The problems of the nfl can be cleared up so easily. Mandatory 4 year degree.
sactochris Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 God made grass, man made booze. Who can you trust.
poisonowns Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 The problems of the nfl can be cleared up so easily. Mandatory 4 year degree. The NFL wouldn't risk losing money by doing that.
anacostiakat Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 True, but just like any company's policies and procedures, someone has to take the time to evaluate them prior to making any changes. Lets not forget a group of 50-65 year old owners will probably have to vote on it too. Who knows maybe it'll change within the next couple of years. Alcohol is legal and I'm sure plenty of guys drink after games and in the off season. Luckily for the players that want to smoke weed the NFL is much more open to considering change than Major League Baseball. NFL could start allowing marijuana and baseball may not change their rules for 30 more years. Yea. And I agree that it is a reasonable idea to limit drugs and alcohol during games. But for legal substances I think it unreasonable after games or in off seasons. Times have changed. If you listen to guys like Sonny Jurgensen they drank at halftime in the good old days.
poisonowns Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 Well either way at this point its only legal in 2 states right? This may take a while.
DrunkenMonkey Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 If it really can be shown that pot helps with concussion recovery, then that would be the end of the debate, I would think.
matt14 Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 Its anything but performance enhancing, Apart from maybe setting a bad example I cant see an issue if its legal where he lives. I was on a job a couple of years ago in Holland, we had half a day before flying home at the end so went to a coffee shop legally smoked a couple of joints of ` Widow maker` . Worse thing I have done in a long time knocked me bandy , felt like someone had thrown bags of cement on me , couldn't move, didn't enjoy it. If he can play stoned I would say he deserves a medal.
Dozerhead Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 Keep in mind that in the NFL, there is a program for substance abuse and a program for PED's. They are tested totally seperate and to my knowledge, the testing schedules are different, too. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the testing window for substance abuse (cocaine, marijuana, etc.) is only 3 months prior to the season, unless you are a one time offender. In those cases, the testing is random throughout the year. Knowing this, it still amazes me that players get caught the first time. Just stay clean for that period (they are told when the schedule is) then you are free and clear the remainder of the year, but some players can't control themselves. It will be interesting to see if the NFL policy regarding marijuana changes it evidence continues to show the therapuetic effects on head trauma or if more states move toward legalization. That said, I live in Texas and I would be shocked if it is legalized here.
NastyPirate Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 Yea but I have to conclude that company policy is based on that fact that there is a federal law against it. I don't necessarily agree with your argument that company policy would be based on Federal law. Alcohol abuse (or drinking before work) is against company policy with most companies, and it is not a Federal law. I suspect that Czar's rules are written by The Prez, so none of the above would apply there.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now