Handling of Randy Gregory Looks Bad on NFL, NFLPA

[Nightman]

Really? Because it's bull**** BK that's why and you know it. He got arrested doesn't matter for how much weed he had on him. He still had it. But for whatever the reason you keep defending it. I don't see why? Come on man I just thanked for you the info and you gotta go that low? Right on hope you feel better.

Sorry I didn't mean to get personal but I see everyone overlooking Gregory's role in his own troubles

 

[xwalker]

And against the Cards as well.

I don't remember that one. Was the officiating controversial then also?
2005 Steelers vs Seahawks 21-10
2008 Steelers vs Cardinals 27-23

 

[Biggems]

I have no issue with Gregory being suspended. I have issue with others, with the same or similar violations, not receiving the same disciplinary action.

It is similar to how the refs seem to call us for penalties, game in and game out, that they just refuse to call on our opponents, no matter how blatant they are. I am ok with us being flagged, if we commit the infraction, but I demand the same of the opposition.

 

[Nightman]

This the issue that I have with. If the NFL won't let the team help the person by having them around the facility for the support which addicts need than the NFL is doing the player a disservice. As I have said previously, banishing him from the facility will not help him but hurt him more. I hope he can turn his life around and beat this disease.

they tried the way you suggested for the first 5 failed test and it obviously didn't work

banishment means banishment......time for Plan B, C , D and E

 

[CCBoy]

I have no issue with Gregory being suspended. I have issue with others, with the same or similar violations, not receiving the same disciplinary action.

It is similar to how the refs seem to call us for penalties, game in and game out, that they just refuse to call on our opponents, no matter how blatant they are. I am ok with us being flagged, if we commit the infraction, but I demand the same of the opposition.

A convicted and imprisoned person has procedural guarantees that protect personal rights. There has to be a punishable element to equal the degree of limitations applied to a person's rights. This was a high crime against nature and society...a missed urination equal to banishment at any level of due process?

 

[xwalker]

This the issue that I have with. If the NFL won't let the team help the person by having them around the facility for the support which addicts need than the NFL is doing the player a disservice. As I have said previously, banishing him from the facility will not help him but hurt him more. I hope he can turn his life around and beat this disease.

fully agree..........instead of banishment, the NFL should go the route of matching time spent with the team in practice etc.....should be matched with some form of community service---youth groups under supervision etc.

If a player goes to rehab and follows the plan, he should get some consideration for a reduced sentence.

 

[phildadon86]

I don't remember that one. Was the officiating controversial then also?
2005 Steelers vs Seahawks 21-10
2008 Steelers vs Cardinals 27-23

Yeah. There was a horrible no call on james harrison for blantant and i mean BLATANT unsportsmanlike conduct. And the biggest one was the "fumble" from Kurt Warner which was an incomplete pass. Arm was fully moving forward, refs didnt even bother to review it.

 

[Biggems]

A convicted and imprisoned person has procedural guarantees that protect personal rights. There has to be a punishable element to equal the degree of limitations applied to a person's rights. This was a high crime against nature and society...a missed urination equal to banishment at any level of due process?

They all know going in that a missed test will be construed as a positive test, unless they have an absolutely solid excuse for missing.

 

[Nightman]

A convicted and imprisoned person has procedural guarantees that protect personal rights. There has to be a punishable element to equal the degree of limitations applied to a person's rights. This was a high crime against nature and society...a missed urination equal to banishment at any level of due process?

You know it wasn't just a missed piss test.......you are being intentionally dishonest with yourself

It was several violations over a very short period of time.....and other violators have also been banished...Josh Gordon, Justin Blackmon, Aldon Smith....Gregory is not alone or persecuted......he failed multiple tests in college, he failed at the combine and he failed multiple times since he was in the program

 

[tyke1doe]

Well, considering the sugar dense diets of Americans leading to the increasing obesity factor and health factors along with it, I'm sure you can find some. In addition, the major "health problems" associated with marijuana involve respiratory issues, of which there is plenty of skepticism mainly because lack of samples.

Eating meat is less harmful than marijuana in terms of health. But that's not what I asked you. I asked you for a study that compares pot and sugar and determines that the former is less harmful than the later.
As my comparison with meat suggests, that's not how studies are done. You don't just pick a substance to make a comparison. Studies are very specific in their intent. That's why I asked for one that studies both the negative impact of sugar and the negative impact of pot.

Sugar is also said to be a "gateway drug" to alcohol. I've linked studies confirming that fact.

I must have missed your links. Did you include them in this thread? Be that as it may, the "gateway drug" argument and studies are curious to me for two reasons:
1. Everything is a gateway drug now.
2. I'm not certain whether the studies are proportional to the population of users. What I mean is of the total population of people who use sugar, how many have gone on to use harder drugs? Of those who use simply marijuana, how many of them go on to use harder drugs? I assume there's a statistical sample size used in these studies, but it would seem that sugar usage would be more ubiquitous than marijuana usage making the former harder to quantify as a "true" gateway drug.
3. Gateway drug is a bit general as my point about everything being a gateway drug. Have any studies been done on if sugar is a mind-altering substance that leads to participation in other mind-altering substances. The gateway drug connect may be more a mind-altering drug leading to other mind-altering drugs than an addiction leading to additional addictions, if that makes sense.

No one's flying a plane on marijuana. And anyone responsible arent doing those things on marijuana, if they were going to do it when it was "legal" (even though obviously not when operating heavy equipment), they're already doing it. That's the point.

First, uh, yes, some are using marijuana while flying.
Second, I don't quite understand what you're saying, but it sounds like a circular argument. The reason we have laws, policies and guidelines is not because of responsible people but because of irresponsible people. I'm not going to break into another person's house and steal their property because I'm governed by a higher law. But we have earthly laws because some people will break into people's homes if you don't spell it out for them. And, in accordance with your 'people are dumb' mantra, you have to tell some people what is unacceptable. So, through the knowledge of the law and policy, you have to tell people how to act responsibly in situations where they would act irresponsibly.
Moreover, in the article I cited above, the issue now that marijuana is becoming legal in many states and in other nations is how do we handle situations involving employment, the law and prohibitions of marijuana use. If it is an issue, that means this situation is occurring.

The "cost" society is bearing is exponentially more with obesity from fast food/sugar condense products. Obesity caused care is between $150-200 billion yearly, with 2/3 of adults and 1/3 of children facing weight and more extreme obesity issues.

So? How does this disprove what I'm saying? We're dealing with obesity as a society. We'll have to deal with marijuana usage and the impact associated with it if it's legalized.

The cost of rehabilitation for people who smoke marijuana, if they actually do need it, when many are full functional adults will be more than offset by the cost of housing the 120,000 inmates on any given day, who are in jail for simple marijuana possession.

Why do you keep offering examples and arguments that are not in dispute?

As far as people that have used it thinking it's ridiculous, maybe people don't tell you they do because you put off the vibe you're going to be completely uncool about it? I know many successful, very successful people, that do it anywhere from rarely to habitually.

I have no idea what you're talking about and what significance this has to what I'm saying. Sorry.

The truth is, there are a lot of dumb people. The fact that they smoke marijuana doesn't make them any less dumb. There are also plenty of dumb people that don't smoke marijuana. If you're an intelligent and reasonable person, marijuana isn't going to suddenly make you not.

Who said anything about being dumb? Mind-altering does not necessarily equate to lack of intelligence.

Anyone who wants to get marijuana can already get it. It's everywhere. This crazy marijuana use increase isn't going to suddenly happen, it's saturated by people who do it anyway. The question is, if we're actually going to be logical about it and stop wasting so much damn money on pursuing a completely unreasonable objective for a substance that's not even that harmful to begin with and in many cases could actually be a valid treatment.

First, if you legalize a practice, it signals to society that it is acceptable, and it WILL increase usage. This just stands to reason. That's one of the reasons we have laws.
Second, I don't disagree with you on coming up with an alternative to decriminalization, particularly as it relates to marijuana use. But that's not my argument here.
Third, please don't conflate recreational use vs. medicinal use. I'm not against marijuana for medicine purposes.

 

[CCBoy]

They all know going in that a missed test will be construed as a positive test, unless they have an absolutely solid excuse for missing.

The fact is that it isn't, and the punishment still has to measure up to the crime, and not misapplied. There is also a concept at law, as to matters in extenuation and mitigation.

Matching the human element with straining the beet for blood.

The player was in a program to over come the problem so stated by the NFL, and had not been declared a failure. Did the program also have urine evaluations as a condition for participation? No, there is a lot more not being presented or talked about that mitigates the reason used by the NFL. There is a judicial element to governing, and the NFL has attempted to remain divorced from the concepts...at least until Congress started to sniff at their doors.

 

[RamziD]

RGregory has no leg to stand on.....he has failed or missed over 6 tests judging by numbers of fines and suspensions

1st fail - enter the program at the Combine 2015
2nd fail - 2 game fine 2015
3rd fail - 4 game fine 2015
4th fail - 4 game suspension 2/16
5th fail - 10 game suspension 9/16
6th fail - year long ban at least 11/16



1- Arrested for DUI and a bag of weed- 3 games reduced to 2 because the new rules were used
2- Missed a couple tests- 4 games reduced to 3 because he had surgery and couldn't drive to one test
3????- Next fail = 4 games

I don't see any favoritism for Bell

What is your definition of "a couple" of tests? You might want to be more specific. And why does Bell get a reduction for his excuse of can't drive after surgery (which is a stupid excuse. There are many ways to get to an appointment. Uber? Friends? Family?), but no such reduction for can't take the test because I'm in rehab?

 

[CowboyStar88]

Sorry I didn't mean to get personal but I see everyone overlooking Gregory's role in his own troubles

All good bro

 

[TellerMorrow34]

You know how you avoid these issues?

Stop doing stupid things.

People can be mad at the NFL and Goodell and the Players Association but the reality is that it's all on Randy. If he wasn't a bone head he wouldn't be in this trouble.

People need to stop making excuses for these guys who don't follow rules. It's no one elses fault but their own.

 

[sbark]

If a player goes to rehab and follows the plan, he should get some consideration for a reduced sentence.

yes, incentives to improve..........not isolated and put in position to be tempted all over again......

 

[xwalker]

they tried the way you suggested for the first 5 failed test and it obviously didn't work

banishment means banishment......time for Plan B, C , D and E

There are two issues in this discussion (I think).
1. What Gregory did, why it is or isn't fair and how it relates to other players that missed or failed tests.

2. What the rules should be, not what they are now.

I think some people are referencing #2. It seems the rules and program could stand to be improved. I don't really know all of the day to day details surrounding it, but it does not seem to be setup to help players as much as it probably could be.

a. Going to rehab and following the rules should allow the suspended player to be considered for a reduced sentence.
b. When they are not in rehab, some program for the off-season should be available that would get them credit towards a reduced sentence. This program would could be setup to provide structure for players that have minimal structure in the off-season.

I realize that these guys should be considered grown arse men, but they are young guys that have a ton of structure during the season and during training camp, but then are suddenly on their own for the most part for several months of the year. Yes, I know they can go to team facilities to work out, but I think there is minimal structure involved with that for most of the off-season.

Maybe some of this already exists and I just don't know about it, but if not a super big money business like the NFL should be helping it's players to the fullest extent possible.

On a side note, the thing that sucks about drug testing is that the hard drugs are the ones that are least likely to show up on an drug test because they clear the system quickly; whereas, weed is the drug most likely to be detected.

From a personal perspective, I've only smoked weed once in the past 25 years; however, I'm in favor of it being legal everywhere. It irritates me to see some reality cop show where they are doing sting operations to arrest people for weed. The reason it irritates me is because of all the money being spent to catch them as well as the added burden on the jails and court system. We have to pay for all of that. The police spend tons of time and effort on this issue but when I have 20k worth of items stolen, they make a report and then forget about it. They basically tell you right then that they won't put much effort into catching the thieves. The cop laughs and says "It's not like a murder where we're going to go searching for video and put a lot of detective man hours into it. Hopefully you have insurance".

If it was legal, I might consider using it on occasion. When people obtain it illegally, they don't know where it came from. It could have something in it. I've known people that got some that had been sprayed with something toxic that made them sick. I'm not going to get into that, even if I didn't care about the legality issues.

Also, I think that when it is illegal it is indeed a gateway drug for many people. Once somebody has contacts to obtain it illegally, then that same network of dealers can get them anything else (Heroin, etc.). If it was legal, then the distribution system for legal weed would be completely separate from the illegal distribution network for hard drugs.

It is wacky that middle and high school kids can easily get drugs but can't drink alcohol. If I had a 16 old kid, I would prefer him to drink alcohol than to get into illegal drugs. I wouldn't be too worried about him smoking some weed except for the fact that if obtained illegally, then he is interfacing with people that can get him hard drugs.

If weed was legal, then the authorities could take all of the money they spend on sting operations to catch people with weed and instead go 10x on their focus on keeping hard drugs away from kids. It's not realistic in this country, but I would like to see a law where and adult caught selling drugs to kids would get the death penalty. That is not realistic unless you live in the Middle East, but making weed legal would make it easier to increase the penalties for selling illegal drugs.

Another positive from it being legal would be better information on it both good and bad. Right now there is a lot of rhetoric about how bad it is that is put out in an attempt to keep people (especially kids) away from it. I don't think a lot of it is accurate; whereas, the information available about the effects of alcohol is verified. They tell kids that smoking weed will stunt their mental growth. I would like to know if that is true, but at this point the information available seems to be biased depending on who provided it.

Wow, I didn't intend to ramble on, but there is a lot about this issue that bugs me.

Don't get me started on how traffic laws are outdated and ineffective.

 

[Plankton]

What a stupid drug program. Players who haven't failed the once-a-year off-season tests (given randomly sometime between April 20 and August 9) are not tested during the actual season. So, during the preseason games and regular season games when drugs might affect their performance on the field, they aren't tested at all. That means the whole Cowboys team can be smoking pot right now and not worry at all about being tested, except for Randy and anyone else who has failed an offseason test. The whole testing system is backwards.

Simply put, the system is designed to catch players using drugs during the time of the year when it doesn't affect their play on the field, and intentionally avoids testing them when they are actually playing NFL football games and it could affect their play.

Yes, this is the reason why they call it the Idiot Test. You literally have to be an idiot to fail it, because they routinely tip people off before the test if they aren't in the program.

You know who fails this test? Idiots or addicts.

In other words, two types of people that you don't want on your team. Decide for yourself which category Randy Gregory falls into.

 

[Cowboys22]

If a player goes to rehab and follows the plan, he should get some consideration for a reduced sentence.

Why isn't rehab a requirement when you hit the 4 game suspension level? Make the player spend those 4 weeks in rehab and be tested there.

 

[CCBoy]

Yes, this is the reason why they call it the Idiot Test. You literally have to be an idiot to fail it, because they routinely tip people off before the test if they aren't in the program.

You know who fails this test? Idiots or addicts.

In other words, two types of people that you don't want on your team. Decide for yourself which category Randy Gregory falls into.

Not long ago, alcohol was labeled gateway to the devil...

 

[xwalker]

You know how you avoid these issues?

Stop doing stupid things.

People can be mad at the NFL and Goodell and the Players Association but the reality is that it's all on Randy. If he wasn't a bone head he wouldn't be in this trouble.

People need to stop making excuses for these guys who don't follow rules. It's no one elses fault but their own.

I did an incredible amount of stupid things when I was a teenager and into my early twenties. The vast majority of people I knew did a lot of stupid things. I did it and I came from a stable family environment where my parents were both teachers. Without my parents repeated warnings in the back of my mind, it would likely have been a lot worse. Some of these NFL players had minimal structure around them other than football and then they get big money handed to them. It's surprising to me that the problems are not worse.

If the worst thing a guy does is fail some tests for smoking weed, then I think society would be winning. I'm far more concerned about issues with guns, violence and driving while stupid like Josh Brent.

If Gregory smokes weed and that somehow causes him to be dangerous to other people, then I would be concerned.