Peppers

[slinslin]

Why should the league test that?

Test for PED, not for weed. You can leave that to the local authorities.

The NFL simply overreaches. There is no real reason for them to police these things.

 

[JeffGollin]

Alcohol is legal everywhere. Weed is still illegal on the national level. Big difference. How about acting like an adult and not smoke something that is banned by the league? Why should the league have to kowtow and not the other way around?

Weed issue breaks down into 3 parts:

1. Legality (somewhat of a moving target as more states legalize or decriminalize).

2. Health Concerns in general (What does good science say about the impact of ingesting weed on endurance, strength, cognitive skills etc.)

3. "Return on Investment" (Impact of weed-use on such things as short-term memory loss (play recognition?); player's ability to function at the highest level 100% of the time all the time; the crowd the dude hangs out with; willingness to ignore Team or League standards of conduct etc.).

For the player, there are trade-offs to consider - i.e. Is "protecting my right to hang out with whomever I want to" worth the potential harm to my career and loss of millions in earnings?

 

[slinslin]

Weed issue breaks down into 3 parts:

1. Legality (somewhat of a moving target as more states legalize or decriminalize).

2. Health Concerns in general (What does good science say about the impact of ingesting weed on endurance, strength, cognitive skills etc.)

3. "Return on Investment" (Impact of weed-use on such things as short-term memory loss (play recognition?); player's ability to function at the highest level 100% of the time all the time; the crowd the dude hangs out with; willingness to ignore Team or League standards of conduct etc.).

For the player, there are trade-offs to consider - i.e. Is "protecting my right to hang out with whomever I want to" worth the potential harm to my career and loss of millions in earnings?

Point 2 and 3 should not matter to the league at all. This is something that each team can handle with their players.

Point 2 especially is the personal choice of the player. Just like some players eat healthy and others might not. Some players work hard in the offseason to stay in shape and others do not. That ultimately differentiates good and bad players.

On the other hand for some players it might be helpful to overcome stage fright or things like that.

Some players get drunk on a weekly basis.

 

[JeffGollin]

Point 2 and 3 should not matter to the league at all. This is something that each team can handle with their players.

Point 2 especially is the personal choice of the player. Just like some players eat healthy and others might not. Some players work hard in the offseason to stay in shape and others do not. That ultimately differentiates good and bad players.

On the other hand for some players it might be helpful to overcome stage fright or things like that.

Some players get drunk on a weekly basis.

True, but just as using is the personal choice of the player, so is not signing or drafting that player the personal choice of the team.

(Or vice versa. The player has the right not to use. The team should have the right to keep sign and play weed-history players if they want to do so. (But let's not forget that it's the teams who are paying the the big bucks and, as such, should have the right to sign or not sign a "high risk" player.

 

[NJCardFan]

Weed issue breaks down into 3 parts:

1. Legality (somewhat of a moving target as more states legalize or decriminalize).

2. Health Concerns in general (What does good science say about the impact of ingesting weed on endurance, strength, cognitive skills etc.)

3. "Return on Investment" (Impact of weed-use on such things as short-term memory loss (play recognition?); player's ability to function at the highest level 100% of the time all the time; the crowd the dude hangs out with; willingness to ignore Team or League standards of conduct etc.).

For the player, there are trade-offs to consider - i.e. Is "protecting my right to hang out with whomever I want to" worth the potential harm to my career and loss of millions in earnings?

But the league, a private entity, can set whatever rules it seems fit. If you don't want to abide by those rules then you can seek employment elsewhere. And it isn't like the NFL rules are a trade secret. Each player is well aware of the rules and the consequences if they choose to break those rules. This goes for any business. A players so called right to hang out with whom ever they want does not supersede the rules and wants of the employer. No one has a right to work for anyone let alone a professional sports league.

 

[Russ Smith]

But the league, a private entity, can set whatever rules it seems fit. If you don't want to abide by those rules then you can seek employment elsewhere. And it isn't like the NFL rules are a trade secret. Each player is well aware of the rules and the consequences if they choose to break those rules. This goes for any business. A players so called right to hang out with whom ever they want does not supersede the rules and wants of the employer. No one has a right to work for anyone let alone a professional sports league.

That's always been my take too. I don't care if a kid smokes pot or not in the whole scheme of things. If he's on cocaine or meth or whatever the popular other drugs are now that concerns me, all illegal all have a major criminal element around them, but I'm not too concerned about pot.

But if the rules say you can't smoke pot, you can't smoke pot because if you test positive and get suspended it hurts your team and they're paying you lots of money.