Twitter: New proposed cba would eliminate game suspensions for positive marijuana tests

gjkoeppen

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,703
Reaction score
3,327
What's your beef with pot? What are you, 80?

Me personally, absolutely none at all. The difference is I respect the right of companies that don't want their employees using it. What you, me or anyone else does as long as the law or employees don't allow it is us.
.
 

fivetwos

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,061
Reaction score
25,887
I want 95, and to a lesser degree...94, back for mini camp!

Dallas needs them, AND to draft DL, AND to sign a FA DL or two, and very much focus on that part of the team being rebuilt, not just a scrub and some hope.
 

fivetwos

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,061
Reaction score
25,887
David Irving and Randy Gregory back on the team, in the locker room getting ready for a game...

They can take Spicolis van to games.

Have at it, because those two stoned are better than what's been run out there lately.

I don't think Irving would have returned for Garrett, but he will now, and Jerry can sell him on it.
 

fivetwos

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,061
Reaction score
25,887
Gotta say, I'm actually a little excited at what can be added to that DL to make it into something really competitive.

New staff, new players from various sources.

That's the definition of hope....and really all we have as fans of Jerry's toy.
 

DandyDon52

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,214
Reaction score
15,286
He's a 5 year veteran that has played what......20 games?
If that, but you cant quit something for a year or 2 and come back and be the same.
And he wasnt that great when he was younger and in the groove.
But if that rule passes, jerry will bring him back.
 

Flamma

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,802
Reaction score
18,666
That's huge. Big concession from the owners. Welcome to 2020!

What exactly are they giving up? Absolutely nothing.

That is a proposal from the NFLPA to the owners. The new CBA hasn't been approved so it's a little or way to soon to be proclaiming anything. Personally I don't think the league should agree with that. The courts have already ruled that even though it may be legal in some states that employers in those states can still have company policies the forbid the use of it and is legal grounds for either not hiring someone that tests positive or terminated for testing positive. People that are not in professional sports can legally take steroids but that doesn't mean the NFL shouldn't be able to ban that.
.

This is all true. But IMO the league should just stick with actions detrimental to the league and leave it at that. No reason to test for weed in the first place. If they get arrested or otherwise caught in public, then act. Most jobs only random drug test when their employees either drive company vehicles or operate heavy equipment. Otherwise there is no random drug testing.
 

stilltheguru

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,698
Reaction score
13,536
Me personally, absolutely none at all. The difference is I respect the right of companies that don't want their employees using it. What you, me or anyone else does as long as the law or employees don't allow it is us.
.
Its well in the rights of the NFLPA to fight it too. And if the nfl gives in then step off your high horse sir
 

Hoofbite

Well-Known Member
Messages
40,570
Reaction score
11,124
The league should just quietly stop testing for it. Makes no sense to me why they continue to shine the light on this. Nothing good for the league, the player, the team or the fans comes from trying to weed out the smokers.

Yeah, they're setting themselves up by testing for it and ignoring the results. Either test for it and continue to punish those who fail, or don't test for it at all.
 

gjkoeppen

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,703
Reaction score
3,327
What exactly are they giving up? Absolutely nothing.



This is all true. But IMO the league should just stick with actions detrimental to the league and leave it at that. No reason to test for weed in the first place. If they get arrested or otherwise caught in public, then act. Most jobs only random drug test when their employees either drive company vehicles or operate heavy equipment. Otherwise there is no random drug testing.

And if they don't test for weed do you really want to see players because they have some pain before a game smoke some weed before coming to a game? Even though you said companies only test if the drive for them or run heavy equipment which isn't true, playing a extreme contact sport and you want to run the chance that some won't be using before games? I work for a company that doesn't involve driving or running any heavy equipment but failing a drug test is grounds for immediate termination.
.
 

gjkoeppen

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,703
Reaction score
3,327
Its well in the rights of the NFLPA to fight it too. And if the nfl gives in then step off your high horse sir

Oh it's being on a high horse to obey laws and respect company policies? How about you stop acting like a little kid and more like a mature adult. I can't talk for you but I was raised to obey laws and respect what an employer's rules are.
.
 

stilltheguru

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,698
Reaction score
13,536
Oh it's being on a high horse to obey laws and respect company policies? How about you stop acting like a little kid and more like a mature adult. I can't talk for you but I was raised to obey laws and respect what an employer's rules are.
.
Lol laws. If it was a law to turn in all firearms would you do so? :popcorn:
 

glimmerman

Well-Known Member
Messages
29,956
Reaction score
29,842
So just game check fines. Gregory will be playing for free. Irving may or may not come back and not sure if MM will have him.
 

Gaede

Well-Known Member
Messages
17,165
Reaction score
14,127
Me personally, absolutely none at all. The difference is I respect the right of companies that don't want their employees using it. What you, me or anyone else does as long as the law or employees don't allow it is us.
.

Law is one thing. But employers--companies in particular--should have zero say on what you do outside of work. There are some exceptions, for sure, but most of us should be free to smoke pot and still work and make money.
 

starfan1

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,126
Reaction score
11,385
Listening to the fan they speculate it’s not going to be passed by nflpa. Mostly because owners proposal on game 17 checks would cap out around 250,000 so those folks making more than that get the shaft. They also said that the owners aren’t giving too much on the weed thing. I’ll need to read up on it myself as I don’t have a link but if what they are saying is true then there is minimal chance this thing gets passed by players. They will get more of the revenue like 2% more. Way to sacrifice billionaires . Also heard owners can pass extra game even without player consent
 

gjkoeppen

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,703
Reaction score
3,327
Lol laws. If it was a law to turn in all firearms would you do so? :popcorn:

That is PROTECTED under the U.S. Constitution, smoking weed isn't. Law makers won't ever pass that because they know that it's protected and would never get signed into law. You're how old, 10?
.
 

gjkoeppen

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,703
Reaction score
3,327
Law is one thing. But employers--companies in particular--should have zero say on what you do outside of work. There are some exceptions, for sure, but most of us should be free to smoke pot and still work and make money.

People are free to do as they feel but unfortunately the courts have already ruled that employers can still enforce any policy that states they can terminate for a fail drug test and they are still free to do pre-employment and random testing.
.
 
Top