NFL banned substance rules should vary by state.

[Sports Hernia]

If the rules varied by state, Seattle & Denver would be building absolute dynasties. There wouldn't be a better recruiting tool than the ability for the players to be allowed to get baked 24/7. MANY players love their weed, even considering the massive financial risks they take to smoke it mid-season

In the NBA, the Nuggets would have 12 future hall of famers on their roster

It's called HFA for a reason.

 

[Sports Hernia]

Marijuana DUI Arrests UP 50 Percent Since Legalization...

The Washington State Patrol normally stops about 1,000 motorists annually for driving under the influence of marijuana.

According to new data released by the WSP this week, some 745 drivers tested positive for pot in just the last six months.

If that average continues, it would mean just under 1,500 drivers nabbed in 2013 — about a 50 percent increase over 2012.

or it just means that prior to being legalized, it simply wasn't standard practice to administer a marijuana test to every person pulled over. But I'm sure that now that its legal all the weed users have suddenly just decided to get high and drive in droves. .

Just a few months after being legalised my younger brother and a group of young kids were convinced smoking pot was a ok because " hey its legal now!" they then started driving while high too(apparently their decision making was impaired go figure). So I don't think you can say that legalization and higher amounts of arrest for dui is not related in any way.

Stupid is as stupid does. You could have replaced the word marijuana with the word alcohol.

 

[kobebryant]

IMO in 2013 I find it ridiculous and archaic to suspend any athlete in any sport in any state for recreational drug use (driving and trafficking though of course should be punished). I just don't see the correlation between recreational drug use and it being something that affects any sport enough to warrant punishment.

Though the rules are what they are so guys need to be smarter. And absolutely those rules are reasonable in occupations such as aviation, driving, police work and military.

There is an odd dichotomy of priorities at play when the Seahawks end up losing more man games to recreational drug use then they ever did under past regimes when Jerramy Stevens, Rockey Bernard and Leroy Hill were legitimate threats to society.

 

[SalishHawkFan]

What about airline pilots who live in Washington and Colorado?

What about law enforcement and probation officers?

What about the fact marijuana doesn't impair any of these professions when not used on the job and better screening methods to determine how recently they were used needs to be implemented?

How about football players are not flying planes nor are they helping themselves by getting stoned during a game?

 

[mikeak]

What about airline pilots who live in Washington and Colorado?

What about law enforcement and probation officers?

I just had to post and let you know that I got your post.....clearly not everyone did

 

[bestfightstory]

What about airline pilots who live in Washington and Colorado?

What about law enforcement and probation officers?

I just had to post and let you know that I got your post.....clearly not everyone did

Thank you-that was nice of you.

 

[HawkFan72]

NFL players have plenty of time off every year to smoke if they want to.

Not only that, but even the very best football players only play for 15 years.

Most NFL players only play for 2-5.

I'm sorry if I don't feel sorry for these millionaires who can't stay away from pot for a few years.

After their career, if they live in Washington, they are free to smoke as much as they want.

I know NFL players are proven to have no self control, but come on. It's not that hard to wait a few years.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

What about the fact marijuana doesn't impair any of these professions when not used on the job and better screening methods to determine how recently they were used needs to be implemented?

I thought the whole idea of legalizing marijuana was to SAVE money.

 

[SalishHawkFan]

Im shocked no one has brought up the most relevant reason why the NFL would never do this; weed is still illegal federally. I dont think the NFL would ever legalize it in WA and CO because in essence they would be starting a fight with the US gov. Also, theres the issue that players traded from the Sehawks and Broncos would be more likely to become mentally addicted to weed, and keep smoking wherever they are traded. Thats why I dont think any owners would really support a motion like that at all. And Roger certainly wouldnt. So its a big "NO" imo.

1) You are right it is not legal according to to Federal law
2) You are wrong the NFL can NEVER legalize weed. They can at any point make it not prohibited and not test for it. There are no rules that they must test for it if they choose not to. Not like they are hiring truck drivers and citizens would have a case to sue them for players being high.

If the Federal Government actually legalized pot then there could be a potential issue for the NFL. Private companies could still do whatever the heck they wanted but the NFL operates under an Antitrust Exemption. It could conceivably be argued by a player that while a private company they are prohibiting something that is legal and there are no other employers that they could go to.

They can make that case right now.

 

[twisted_steel2]

It is kinda weird in the fact that MJ is now a medicine. It legitimately helps some people with a variety of problems. I think calling people druggies for smoking weed is pretty close minded.

That being said, these guys absolutely know the rules and it doesn't vary from state to state, nor should it. Just follow the rules as stated, make your millions, retire on a ton of Thai Sticks and ride off into the sunset.

I scanned through the entire thread, this was the only mention I saw of pot being used as medicine.

Now BB and Thurmond knew the rules, they'd signed an agreement with their employer.. I really can't defend them.

But I've heard some talk on the radio and some tweets, that got me thinking, I think a majority of the marijuana use by NFL athletes is not recreational, but therapeutic. Some people will probably ignore this, or laugh at this, but pot is a great pain killer, and relaxer.

After what these guys put their bodies through, the training, the punishment, the pain, the injury's.... not to mention the emotional roller coaster and stressful spotlight they are under, man honestly pot is probably a fantastic way to deal with all that after a game and in recovery mode. We as just fans cannot relate to what they are going through. We like to think we can, but we can't.

Healthier than pain pills. Healthier than alcohol. But whatever, just another perspective. Flame on. unno:

 

[CityHawk]

Doesn't matter if it is legal in some states or not. The NFL is company that can make any policy it wants with relation to drugs/alcohol. This isn't a discussion about the effects or legality of marijuana, it's a discussion about someone knowing what the rules are and breaking them on more than one occasion.

 

[NorCal]

Im shocked no one has brought up the most relevant reason why the NFL would never do this; weed is still illegal federally. I dont think the NFL would ever legalize it in WA and CO because in essence they would be starting a fight with the US gov. Also, theres the issue that players traded from the Sehawks and Broncos would be more likely to become mentally addicted to weed, and keep smoking wherever they are traded. Thats why I dont think any owners would really support a motion like that at all. And Roger certainly wouldnt. So its a big "NO" imo.

1) You are right it is not legal according to to Federal law
2) You are wrong the NFL can NEVER legalize weed. They can at any point make it not prohibited and not test for it. There are no rules that they must test for it if they choose not to. Not like they are hiring truck drivers and citizens would have a case to sue them for players being high.

If the Federal Government actually legalized pot then there could be a potential issue for the NFL. Private companies could still do whatever the heck they wanted but the NFL operates under an Antitrust Exemption. It could conceivably be argued by a player that while a private company they are prohibiting something that is legal and there are no other employers that they could go to.

But the ban on marijuana use is collectively bargained. And issues agreed upon as a result of collective bargaining is exempt under the Antitrust law. So, the NFLPA would have to NOT include the ban in a CBA. Then if the NFL wanted to ban the use of it, they could have a claim.

 

[coorslighthawk]

I for one would not oppose the nfl dropping the marijuana rule. IMO it is in no way performance enhancing. I am a professional athlete and get randomly drug tested thru USADA. They drop in randomly at all times of the day/night unannounced. In fact I had to perform a test at Sluggers before Hawks vs Saints playoff game. Thankfully alcohol is cool although the tester did laugh and said my pee looked like straight beer! If I get even a small whiff of weed in the air when I am out, I have to make a run for it in fear of a positive test...which for me results in a lifetime competition suspension. I feel for these guys cause even tho it is a rule...its pretty stupid.

 

[mikeak]

Im shocked no one has brought up the most relevant reason why the NFL would never do this; weed is still illegal federally. I dont think the NFL would ever legalize it in WA and CO because in essence they would be starting a fight with the US gov. Also, theres the issue that players traded from the Sehawks and Broncos would be more likely to become mentally addicted to weed, and keep smoking wherever they are traded. Thats why I dont think any owners would really support a motion like that at all. And Roger certainly wouldnt. So its a big "NO" imo.

1) You are right it is not legal according to to Federal law
2) You are wrong the NFL can NEVER legalize weed. They can at any point make it not prohibited and not test for it. There are no rules that they must test for it if they choose not to. Not like they are hiring truck drivers and citizens would have a case to sue them for players being high.

If the Federal Government actually legalized pot then there could be a potential issue for the NFL. Private companies could still do whatever the heck they wanted but the NFL operates under an Antitrust Exemption. It could conceivably be argued by a player that while a private company they are prohibiting something that is legal and there are no other employers that they could go to.

They can make that case right now.

They cannot make that case. The federal government doesn't allow for using pot / weed. The fact that the State of Washington allows for smoking pot is irrelevant. At no point does the State of Washington limit employeers to not allow pot. There are companies in this country that doesn't allow employees to smoke cigarettes. Yes normal Marlboro smokes that you buy anywhere are not allowed by many companies in this country. They have a right to do so.

There would ONLY be a case if the federal government allowed POT and the case is only there because of the antitrust exemption

 

[mikeak]

I for one would not oppose the nfl dropping the marijuana rule. IMO it is in no way performance enhancing. I am a professional athlete and get randomly drug tested thru USADA. They drop in randomly at all times of the day/night unannounced. In fact I had to perform a test at Sluggers before Hawks vs Saints playoff game. Thankfully alcohol is cool although the tester did laugh and said my pee looked like straight beer! If I get even a small whiff of weed in the air when I am out, I have to make a run for it in fear of a positive test...which for me results in a lifetime competition suspension. I feel for these guys cause even tho it is a rule...its pretty stupid.

These guys ran for it and got away with it if you are smart enough you can figure it out

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/07/sport ... .html?_r=0

 

[mikeak]

Im shocked no one has brought up the most relevant reason why the NFL would never do this; weed is still illegal federally. I dont think the NFL would ever legalize it in WA and CO because in essence they would be starting a fight with the US gov. Also, theres the issue that players traded from the Sehawks and Broncos would be more likely to become mentally addicted to weed, and keep smoking wherever they are traded. Thats why I dont think any owners would really support a motion like that at all. And Roger certainly wouldnt. So its a big "NO" imo.

1) You are right it is not legal according to to Federal law
2) You are wrong the NFL can NEVER legalize weed. They can at any point make it not prohibited and not test for it. There are no rules that they must test for it if they choose not to. Not like they are hiring truck drivers and citizens would have a case to sue them for players being high.

If the Federal Government actually legalized pot then there could be a potential issue for the NFL. Private companies could still do whatever the heck they wanted but the NFL operates under an Antitrust Exemption. It could conceivably be argued by a player that while a private company they are prohibiting something that is legal and there are no other employers that they could go to.

But the ban on marijuana use is collectively bargained. And issues agreed upon as a result of collective bargaining is exempt under the Antitrust law. So, the NFLPA would have to NOT include the ban in a CBA. Then if the NFL wanted to ban the use of it, they could have a claim.

Excellent point. Someone wiser than me would have to chime in. Possible that an individual player could argue that the CBA limited his rights and went against his rights etc. Not sure if it would matter if he had been a part of the NFL and thereby "accepted" the CBA or not.

Guessing a lawyer is not going to look into this until the federal laws are changed so I have a feeling we are going to have to wait awhile

 

[seahawks08]

What about airline pilots who live in Washington and Colorado?

What about law enforcement and probation officers?

Driving or flying under the influence is a problem I agree. Showing up under the influence at work is a problem too, but doing it in their own time as recreational does not make sense. So be it Pilots, Law Enforcement or anyone, as long as it does not impact your work, it should not be an offense in my opinion.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

What about airline pilots who live in Washington and Colorado?

What about law enforcement and probation officers?

What business is it of yours what anyone does on their free time. Im pretty sure they were not hot boxing the locker room at halftime!

Really there is NO difference having a couple drinks at night in your home or smoking a joint, none!

You guys all crack me up. Do you just randomly pick a post to respond to or do you read it first? I personally don't care about drug use. I have been to NFL games on LSD on multiple occasions. The point of this thread was to suggest that the NFL should have different rules for players in different states. Why then should that same courtesy not be extended to ALL residents of that state, regardless of profession?

Damn dude, seems like a waste of a good acid trip to me but, hey different strokes and all.

 

[chris98251]

Some argue that if it's legal in Washington then it should not be a banned substance, so the team lights up on the flight out of Seattle and lands in Dallas, they test the whole team in Dallas before disembarqueing, whole team and coaching staff test positive. Now what, your in Texas not Washington.

 

[TwistedHusky]

This is ridiculous.

Do you really think it is in the best interests of a team to allow its players to use substances that negatively impact performance? MJ use affects energy levels and concentration, in both short and long term. It absolutely has a history of negatively impacting drive and initiative.

You could certainly argue that alcohol impairs performance too, but since nobody allows players to play while drunk this is not as much of an issue.

It is completely counterproductive for an athlete that is looking to increase his own abilities and attributes, vs other athletes looking to do that same thing, to use substances that hinder both elements.

So yes, the teams and the league ban it, generally also because in the bulk of the locations where players can be expected to play - those substances are illegal.

The best response is not to look to change the ban but to look to change the behavior that keeps breaking the bans.

If the players are too foolish and self-centered to deal with that restriction then the punishments are completely reasonable.