NFL Off-Season Thread

[AZ_]

I mean... you kinda ignored most of his points that he started his post with, and then asserted his "entire post is wrong".

It was.

Calling people stupid because they're addicted to a substance isn't a valid argument. Nor was his assertion that I've "missed his point."

If he thinks its constructive or correct to say that people who can't stop using a substance their addicted to are "stupid," than he is purposely misunderstanding the concept of addiction itself.

It doesn't matter if there are millions of dollars on the line, or nothing. His premise is simply wrong.


You can either believe in the science behind addiction, or you don't. There is no construct in which the science changes or matters less just because someone plays in the NFL, or has money to lose.

 

[bob2the2nd]

It was.

Calling people stupid because they're addicted to a substance isn't a valid argument. Nor was his assertion that I've "missed his point."

If he thinks its constructive or correct to say that people who can't stop using a substance their addicted to are "stupid," than he is purposely misunderstanding the concept of addiction itself.

It doesn't matter if there are millions of dollars on the line, or nothing. His premise is simply wrong.


You can either believe in the science behind addiction, or you don't. There is no construct in which the science changes or matters less just because someone plays in the NFL, or has money to lose.

We are getting into a weed conversation here, versus the NFL. But as someone that has never tried weed (and fully supports its legalization) i was under the impression its not addictive? But more of the "lifestyle" it creates is addictive (i am sure that is absolutely incorrect terminology). Addiction is addiction and I agree that someone being addictive to a substance is absolutely not "stupid". However I would argue that the support of legalization and thus a call for the NFL to eliminate these rules should be more thought through if in fact young people are more susceptible to its usage (Which seems to be the case) and especially young people with an over abundance of income***.

*** Please remember that there havent been significant studies into the usages of weed (at least in this country), because until very recently we couldnt even study it. So i would just be careful arguing that young people with lots of money arent more susceptible to getting caught up trying possibly addictive substances.

 

[Lee]

We are getting into a weed conversation here, versus the NFL. But as someone that has never tried weed (and fully supports its legalization) i was under the impression its not addictive? But more of the "lifestyle" it creates is addictive (i am sure that is absolutely incorrect terminology). Addiction is addiction and I agree that someone being addictive to a substance is absolutely not "stupid". However I would argue that the support of legalization and thus a call for the NFL to eliminate these rules should be more thought through if in fact young people are more susceptible to its usage (Which seems to be the case) and especially young people with an over abundance of income***.

*** Please remember that there havent been significant studies into the usages of weed (at least in this country), because until very recently we couldnt even study it. So i would just be careful arguing that young people with lots of money arent more susceptible to getting caught up trying possibly addictive substances.

Its not addictive physically, it can be for certain people mentally.

The issue with Gordon is he has mental illness, depression. He gets treated for it. His medicine works fine 95% of the time or whatever fake number you want to make up.

He realizes if he gets caught he could lose his career, so why does he smoke? Is he the world's biggest idiot?

I brought up the guy that knows him to show Gordon is not an idiot, he suffers from depression. It comes down to that 5% of the time when the depression medicine doesnt work. My ex wife suffered from depression. Its very serious. It is a life threatening disease. You can kill yourself because of it. Its not just mind over matter for those that have it. If thats what you think, then you are completely missing the point on depression.

So in those very dark days and dark times, weed helps Josh cope and not kill himself. For him, weed keeps him alive. Doesnt make you run faster, doesnt make you jump higher, but in his case, it does keep him alive. Not always, not often, but often enough he gets caught every year or so smoking. He has too on those days as staying alive is more important than his NFL career.

2 things you have to understand. If you dont you wont get it. 1, depression can be a fatal disease. 2. weed is what works best for some people like Godon. Except and understand those 2 facts, you will understand why Josh cant stay off it 100% of the time.

 

[bushwick_bill]

Oh man, those were the days.

HAHAHA yes they were!

 

[JDailey23]

I don’t get what you missed? If you sell a joint or get caught smoking one, it shouldn’t be a bug deal.
If you get caught with 200 pounds and it appears ready to be sold, that’s a problem.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Actually weed is worse because it doesnt help your performance, so why ban it unless you are just a complete asshole.

Well, drinking alcohol doesn't help performance either. So are owners all assholes for not wanting players to play drunk?

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

Well, drinking alcohol doesn't help performance either. So should owners not care if players show up drunk?

Come on... this isn't a genuine argument. You know that.

There's a massive difference between "showing up drunk" and scheduled testing to see if you've used the substance in the past.

 

[Jack Brickman]

I don’t get what you missed? If you sell a joint or get caught smoking one, it shouldn’t be a bug deal.
If you get caught with 200 pounds and it appears ready to be sold, that’s a problem.

Why? If it's legal to smoke and possess, why should it be illegal to sell? It's a fucking plant.

This isn't a processed substance like cocaine that could have god knows what in it.

 

[Jack Brickman]

Well, drinking alcohol doesn't help performance either. So are owners all assholes for not wanting players to play drunk?

I don't see showing up drunk as any different than showing up high. I wouldn't show up to my job under the influence of either substance, but that doesn't mean I don't use both, and some other drugs as well from time to time, when I'm off the clock. I don't see why it should be any different for athletes when it comes to a drug as harmless (compared to other drugs) as weed. If guys want to use it to cope with their ailments off the clock, more power to them.

 

[Lee]

Well, drinking alcohol doesn't help performance either. So are owners all assholes for not wanting players to play drunk?

No, but also because of his depression. Look I dont want the guy back on the team, no way, no how. But i feel bad for the guy and I just wont flame him for having depression or any of the other really stupid things he did because of his depression.

 

[JDailey23]

That’s the thing. Its not legal to smoke or possess. You can’t run over to Walgreens and buy a joint.

Why? If it's legal to smoke and possess, why should it be illegal to sell? It's a fucking plant.

This isn't a processed substance like cocaine that could have god knows what in it.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

I don't see showing up drunk as any different than showing up high. I wouldn't show up to my job under the influence of either substance, but that doesn't mean I don't use both, and some other drugs as well from time to time, when I'm off the clock. I don't see why it should be any different for athletes when it comes to a drug as harmless (compared to other drugs) as weed. If guys want to use it to cope with their ailments off the clock, more power to them.

I agree. But one of the problems with pot that doesn't really exist with alcohol is that a business can very easily confirm when a player is drunk. Alcohol leaves the bloodstream so quickly that if it is present in sufficient quantities...you're drunk. It's tougher with pot which is why so many employers ban use of pot even in off hours -- because they cannot easily confirm when someone is high. I've seen employers have that problem many times, and it frustrates them.

Anyway, my larger point was just addressing @Lee in saying that owners shouldn't have a problem with pot because it isn't a performance enhancer. I was simply pointing out that owners have a legitimate interest in players using something that is a detriment to performance as well.

I'd point out that "use outside of the game doesn't affect the NFL" would seem to be an argument that would apply to all non-performance enhancing drugs, right? Heroin, cocaine, meth, etc... As long as they're not under the influence at the game or at practice, why should teams care?

I also think the legality is an issue. A majority of states still have the recreational use of marijuana as illegal, and it is still illegal everywhere under federal law. I can certainly see owners saying "hey, we're just going to defer to federal law in determining the drugs players can use", because that's a nice bright line. I do think the NFL is likely to eliminate testing for marijuana if/when the feds legalize it.

 

[AZ_]

That’s the thing. Its not legal to smoke or possess. You can’t run over to Walgreens and buy a joint.

He said "if."

Likely asking because you've personally said you'd change the rules, and so on, and so forth.

With the exception of selling large quantities, which begs the question of why you're okay with one and not the other....but also, I think its long past time that we should be expecting you to answer the questions in good faith.

I no longer believe that is the objective.

 

[Jack Brickman]

He said "if."

Likely asking because you've personally said you'd change the rules, and so on, and so forth.

With the exception of selling large quantities, which begs the question of why you're okay with one and not the other....but also, I think its long past time that we should be expecting you to answer the questions in good faith.

I no longer believe that is the objective.

Exactly. I was operating on JDailey's own hypothetical that small scale possession and smoking were legal. If that's the case, why the fuck should dealing it be illegal too? It makes no sense with weed, which isn't harmful or chemically addictive.

Like, I can get the argument behind decriminalizing other drugs in small quantities but still pursuing dealers, even if I think it's largely a waste of time. But with weed? Have you guys smoked weed? It's not dangerous, and you can't overdose on it. It's far less dangerous than alcohol, which I can walk into any store and buy and countless people overdose on every year.

 

[bushwick_bill]

That’s the thing. Its not legal to smoke or possess. You can’t run over to Walgreens and buy a joint.

I bet you a donut I could go right outside a Walgreens by me, buy a fucking joint in front of the NYPD, light it up and stroll home like no big deal.
And just because...

Walgreens to sell cannabis-based creams, patches and sprays in 9 states

The move comes after rival CVS announced it would be selling cannabis-based products, too.

www.google.com