Ed Werder reporting on ESPN that 20 NFL players will be back (Scandrick?)

Mort just was asked about the probability of this happening (these players being reinstated) and replied 100%. Just not sure if this week or next, probably too late for this week since they won't vote till tonight.

Thanks
 
These kids should be looking to their parents for role models, and the ones who can't, need someone else. I get the idea atheletes need to be role models too, but there is a fine line too. They need their privacy also.
Heck, most kids with parents, and from middle class homes or above, those parents probably smoke pot too. So you can't always tell them to look up to athletes on how to live their lives.

I agree with a lot of what you said. I just don't feel like lowering the threshold for usage sends the right message to anyone. In fact, it sends the exact opposite message.
 
I agree with a lot of what you said. I just don't feel like lowering the threshold for usage sends the right message to anyone. In fact, it sends the exact opposite message.

States have legalized the use of marijuana. I think the morality question is mostly closed and the NFL has had very low limits for a positive sample compared to other leagues and sporting organizations.
 
I agree with a lot of what you said. I just don't feel like lowering the threshold for usage sends the right message to anyone. In fact, it sends the exact opposite message.

States have legalized the use of marijuana. I think the morality question is mostly closed and the NFL has had very low limits for a positive sample compared to other leagues and sporting organizations.

Very good points on both accounts.

Maybe they should resort to testing within so many hours before the game, practices to see what, if any the levels are.
 
States have legalized the use of marijuana. I think the morality question is mostly closed and the NFL has had very low limits for a positive sample compared to other leagues and sporting organizations.

Yes and all states allow alchohol too. I don't think the league would allow players to play drunk. But maybe we're headed that way too.
 
Like the right to smoke a little more pot or use amphetamines? Like it or not, these guys are role models to millions of kids and should be held to a higher standard, not less.

You are talking two different topics. One on substance abuse, and the other or protection of rights. One doesn't get a push from comingling the different subjects.

As to informative, during my time in Service, I was an Drug & Alcohol Advisor as an extra duty, for 12 years. One of my assignments, was with a Custom MP Unit in Germany for two years. No, that wasn't a lesson on social abuse...but even with a sports arena, rights are still protected. And that is part of the collective bargaining umbrellas as well as the tradition of Unions fighting for rights.

Both drug abuse and alcohol abuse are wrong. But one can't brow beat it of use...especially when resorting to putting down another poster, in a ring tapping fashion, as if one possessed sole knowledge of their affects.

Oh, as to role models, you are talking to a Great Grand Parent at present...carry on.

And ethics are a big deal in the NFL. They have even more contractual authority to address just that area...how players are perceived in the public. The NFL spends tons of money and labor to inform and enforce all segments of participatory conduct.

Next time, look before one leaps, or get into the ballpark in response to another's words.
 
Yes and all states allow alchohol too. I don't think the league would allow players to play drunk. But maybe we're headed that way too.

I see the marijuana use as more of pain management tool and way to take the edge off. I don't think anyone would smoke or drink before a game.
 
I agree with a lot of what you said. I just don't feel like lowering the threshold for usage sends the right message to anyone. In fact, it sends the exact opposite message.

Morales aren't legislated...laws are. Same with a contractual agreement involving collective bargaining, those are the controlling elements. And why voting is necessary to change the rules of the game.
 
I agree with a lot of what you said. I just don't feel like lowering the threshold for usage sends the right message to anyone. In fact, it sends the exact opposite message.

What message does it send when a state decided to legalize pot? Or two states? That they should move to said states in order to partake, or that it probably should be legal everywhere as the polls indicate most are for legalizing it?
 
Morales aren't legislated...laws are.

Then why would the Ravens terminate Ray Rice's contract or why would the NFL suspend him indefinitely? Charge's are being dropped. I mean if morals mean nothing shouldn't he be allowed to play?
 
not sure I follow you..

March 11 2014: League year starts
April 20, 2014: drug testing begins
sometime in late August 2014 : Scandrick is suspended 4 games for molly

according to that timeline in conunjction with Rappaport's tweet "Every 2014 league year suspension will be reviewed", Scandrick is eligible to have his suspension reviewed

Yes - but the issue here is that they do not test for drugs of abuse prior to 4-20. If the new policy were in place, Scandrick would not have received a suspension nor would he have come up positive for anything.
 
I read where the NFLPA would not vote on this. so if thats true, they cant ratify it so no cut suspensions. Eeek. I just dont know how to feel about this anymore. Footballs starting to get confusing.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
464,089
Messages
13,788,212
Members
23,772
Latest member
BAC2662
Back
Top