No, if the policy could be shown to be in violation, then the fact that an employee agreed to it still does not make it acceptable.
Obviously Gregory has to deal with the consequences of his actions within the existing rules. I assumed that was obvious and didn't require being stated.
Dez should have held onto the ball in 2014 and the refs wouldn't have been given the opportunity to screw up the call. Dez had to live with the consequences of his actions.
Regardless of Dez screwing up that does not mean it was a good rule or good call.
As I said before, it's a big picture issue.
Big picture means beyond the scope of Randy Gregory specifically.
“No, if the policy could be shown to be in violation, then the fact that an employee agreed to it still does not make it acceptable.”
“Shown to be in violation” of what, specifically? And, “does not make it acceptable” to whom, specifically?
The BIG picture is this: the current CBA, at the time of its signing and as long as it is in effect, was/is “acceptable” to both the NFL and the NFLPA — along with the AFL-CIO, which the NFLPA is a member of.
Perhaps you should take your argument to whomever (?) might find the current NFL drug policy to be unacceptable, and who might be capable of promptly alter the status quo.
