New NFL substance policy: no more testing for pot

[Kirby Jackson]

19 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

The owners could have made this decision befire this CBA reaches its end.  Instead they held on to it because they understood its wildly disproportionate value to the union.  
 

it’s likely there will be 17 games because a percentage of players like to get high in season.  

Regardless of the 17 games or not the marijuana testing is going away. It’s not something that the owner’s want either. The NFLPA knows this. It’s not a leverage chip for that. It’s a bad look for everyone in 2020 when a player gets suspended for weed. The other leagues have already figured that out. It’s going regardless of what else comes. It’s a black eye for the league and the players.

[Royale with Cheese]

29 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

The owners could have made this decision befire this CBA reaches its end.  Instead they held on to it because they understood its wildly disproportionate value to the union.  
 

it’s likely there will be 17 games because a percentage of players like to get high in season.  

 

That percentage is high...no pun intended.  I think Michael Bennett gave an accurate statement in which 90% of the players smoke.

11 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Regardless of the 17 games or not the marijuana testing is going away. It’s not something that the owner’s want either. The NFLPA knows this. It’s not a leverage chip for that. It’s a bad look for everyone in 2020 when a player gets suspended for weed. The other leagues have already figured that out. It’s going regardless of what else comes. It’s a black eye for the league and the players.

 

I wondered why this took so long.

[JaCrispy]

So lucky they can now smoke weed...very jealous my job prohibits it...

[Royale with Cheese]

3 minutes ago, JaCrispy said:

So lucky they can now smoke weed...very jealous my job prohibits it...

 

My friend is a cop who smokes all the time.  They don't get tested unless he's in an accident or they use their gun on a bad guy....he better keep his fingers crossed!

[Mr. WEO]

2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Regardless of the 17 games or not the marijuana testing is going away. It’s not something that the owner’s want either. The NFLPA knows this. It’s not a leverage chip for that. It’s a bad look for everyone in 2020 when a player gets suspended for weed. The other leagues have already figured that out. It’s going regardless of what else comes. It’s a black eye for the league and the players.

 

Without the 17 games in a ratified CBA, it's not going away.  The owners don't care about the "look" of players getting suspended for weed.  If that was true, they could have done away with testing last year or any previous year.  They wouldn't have needed to bargain that away if that's all they wanted to do.  They could have simply announced they stopped testing.  But they chose not to....until they went all in on 17 games (which they have been talking about for far longer than they have been talking about not testing for weed.

 

In the end, they understood the value of that little bit of nothing to the players and used it as a "concession" to get the real gold: another game.  They didn't suddenly wake up and realize it was a "black eye" for them. 

 

2 hours ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

That percentage is high...no pun intended.  I think Michael Bennett gave an accurate statement in which 90% of the players smoke.

 

I wondered why this took so long.

 

See above. The only explanation that makes sense is that they had no reason to stop suspending or testing until they started negotiations with the NFLPA.  The proof of all this is that the first proposal still had testing and positive test parameters only a month ago.  So they were still coming in with "we will test but not suspend".  Of course that makes no sense because there would be no point in testing if there is no punishment.  But it got the NFLPA to buy in.  Then, very recently, they made a "second concession" where they agreed to not even test.  That put the hook in the mouth of the player reps. 

 

I don't believe that 90% of the NFL players smoke.  90% of the players Michael Bennett knows, sure.....but not the rest.

[Royale with Cheese]

2 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

I don't believe that 90% of the NFL players smoke.  90% of the players Michael Bennett knows, sure.....but not the rest.

 

Bennett has played for multiple teams so he has been around.

 

Ricky Williams said in 2016 that 70% smoked.

Lomas Brown said in 2012 that 50% smoked.

It's getting more and more popular.

 

I think you don't want to  believe that the majority smoke but they do.  The majority of college football players I hung out with in college smoked.  

 

You'll never be able to put an exact percentage on it but I would easily put it between 75%-90% as my guess.  

[Hardhatharry]

22 hours ago, MAJBobby said:

So no weed suspensions.  HMmmmm I could have swore somebody here said that

I did and so did lots of people.

[Kirby Jackson]

29 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Without the 17 games in a ratified CBA, it's not going away.  The owners don't care about the "look" of players getting suspended for weed.  If that was true, they could have done away with testing last year or any previous year.  They wouldn't have needed to bargain that away if that's all they wanted to do.  They could have simply announced they stopped testing.  But they chose not to....until they went all in on 17 games (which they have been talking about for far longer than they have been talking about not testing for weed.

 

In the end, they understood the value of that little bit of nothing to the players and used it as a "concession" to get the real gold: another game.  They didn't suddenly wake up and realize it was a "black eye" for them”

We 1,000% disagree on the subject. Everything I’ve said for years is coming to fruition as I said it would. The league cares about “the shield.” The perception of a drug problem is not good for “the shield.” It’s a self-imposed problem. The world, country and science has evolved greatly on the subject since the last CBA. The other leagues have adopted “don’t ask, don’t tell.” That’s what the NFL wants regardless of the other terms of the new CBA. They look foolish pumping out opioids and suspending for weed in 2020. This isn’t a negotiating chip because both sides want the same thing!! 
 

Now, in terms of other drugs maybe so. I’ll buy that. I’m ONLY talking about marijuana. Also, what’s your estimate on % of players that smoke? From my experience and the people that I know it’s well over 70%. 

Edited March 6, 2020 by Kirby Jackson

[Mr. WEO]

17 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

Bennett has played for multiple teams so he has been around.

 

Ricky Williams said in 2016 that 70% smoked.

Lomas Brown said in 2012 that 50% smoked.

It's getting more and more popular.

 

I think you don't want to  believe that the majority smoke but they do.  The majority of college football players I hung out with in college smoked.  

 

You'll never be able to put an exact percentage on it but I would easily put it between 75%-90% as my guess.  

 

Those would all be guesses.  Look at the Bills roster.  Your saying only 5-6 guys don't smoke weed?

[Kirby Jackson]

2 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Those would all be guesses.  Look at the Bills roster.  Your saying only 5-6 guys don't smoke weed?

That’s probably close to right. Based on the guys that I know that played recently the overwhelming majority partake. It may be edibles, vape, etc... but it’s not a couple of guys doing it. It’s a couple of guys not.

[Mr. WEO]

8 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

We 1,000% disagree on the subject. Everything I’ve said for years is coming to fruition As I said it would. The league cares about “the shield.” The perception of a drug problem is not good for “the shield.” It’s a self-imposed problem. The world, country and science has evolved greatly on the subject since the last CBA. The other leagues have adopted “don’t ask, don’t tell.” That’s what the NFL wants regardless of the other terms of the new CBA. They look foolish pumping out opioids and suspending for weed in 2020. This isn’t a negotiating chip because both sides want the same thing!! 
 

Now, in terms of other drugs maybe so. I’ll buy that. I’m ONLY talking about marijuana. Also, what’s your estimate on % of players that smoke? From my experience and the people that I know it’s well over 70%. 

 

So you are saying that if the NFLPA does not ratify the CBA as is, that the NFL will stop testing anyway?  Because it's a black eye?  They don't like suspending players?  They suspended Josh Gordon 5 times.  They reinstated him4 times.  at least twice he took himself out of football because he couldn't stay clean.  They kept letting him back in.  They didn't care about that "look".  GMs wanted him on their roster.

 

Look, if it was at all true that they were concerned about optics, they would have ended testing outside of a CBA at any point in the past when they decided they "cared" about this.  There is no evidence, as a league, that this bothered them at all at any time before last week.

 

They chose not to stop suspending because until now, they had no reason to.  They could have at any time.   Why didn't they until now, when they wanted a huge concession  from the players? 

 

 

[GG]

You also have to consider how the owners timed this.   Pot testing was on the table until last week, and they took it out for the final vote by the players.  

 

Brilliantly played.  

[Kirby Jackson]

19 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

So you are saying that if the NFLPA does not ratify the CBA as is, that the NFL will stop testing anyway?  Because it's a black eye?  They don't like suspending players?  They suspended Josh Gordon 5 times.  They reinstated him4 times.  at least twice he took himself out of football because he couldn't stay clean.  They kept letting him back in.  They didn't care about that "look".  GMs wanted him on their roster.

 

Look, if it was at all true that they were concerned about optics, they would have ended testing outside of a CBA at any point in the past when they decided they "cared" about this.  There is no evidence, as a league, that this bothered them at all at any time before last week.

 

They chose not to stop suspending because until now, they had no reason to.  They could have at any time.   Why didn't they until now, when they wanted a huge concession  from the players? 

 

 

You’re missing my point. They will TRY to use this as a negotiating chip but both sides know that’s a bluff. The PR spin from the player’s would be so strong it would make the league look foolish. “They say that they care about player safety yet they hand out opioids like candy. Roughly 47,000 people die each year from opioid overdoses. The NFL has decided that’s a safer route for us as players. Do they care about us? They talk a big game but their actions say otherwise.” 
 

The league looks bad in 2020 suspending guys for weed. That’s just the way that it is. They know that. That is where we differ. You believe that the owner’s think it’s good for business. They don’t. They don’t like the idea of losing talent for something widely accepted and legal in MANY places. They get criticized for their position. Their league looks like it has a bunch of addicts when they are no worse than other leagues on the subject. Making it go away is what’s best for the owners and players. 

[Royale with Cheese]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Those would all be guesses.  Look at the Bills roster.  Your saying only 5-6 guys don't smoke weed?

 

Yours aren't guesses?  Do you know for sure that the majority don't smoke?  You can state that as a fact?

Edited March 6, 2020 by Royale with Cheese

[Lieutenant Aldo Raine]

So in addition to Gatorade, there will be Doritos and Cheetos snack bags on the sidelines.  While I understand the pain management part, I will be curious to see if the quality of play increases or decreases now that players can toke up as much as they want during the season.

[billsfan89]

1 minute ago, Lieutenant Aldo Raine said:

So in addition to Gatorade, there will be Doritos and Cheetos snack bags on the sidelines.  While I understand the pain management part, I will be curious to see if the quality of play increases or decreases now that players can toke up as much as they want during the season.

 

I'd hate to break it to you but they already were smoking as much as they wanted. The test was extremely easy to beat as it was basically one test before training camp and then you were good for the rest of the year. Aaron Hernandez never got popped for weed so it goes to show you how easy that test was to beat. I don't think anything changes. 

 

I like the policy of "decriminalizing" drugs in the NFL. But I do think that in addition to fines mandatory rehab for serial offenders of recreational drugs other than weed should be there. I don't think you want players going unchecked if they might have a drug problem.  

[Royale with Cheese]

10 minutes ago, Lieutenant Aldo Raine said:

So in addition to Gatorade, there will be Doritos and Cheetos snack bags on the sidelines.  While I understand the pain management part, I will be curious to see if the quality of play increases or decreases now that players can toke up as much as they want during the season.

 

They were already smoking.  

 

They all knew the date of the test, so they would abstain for a few weeks and pass the test....start lighting up again.

 

It doesn't affect people like some believe.....

 

Do you think Michael Phelps only smoked once when that photo came out of him hitting a bong?  He's one of the most conditioned athletes we've ever seen.

[Lieutenant Aldo Raine]

I personally don't give one iotoa about weed; I don't smoke the stuff.  That said, I also don't have a problem with weed if it helps with pain management and doesn't inhibit their performance on the field.  But from what I understand, excessive consumption (like alcohol) can inhibit motor function, and I feel confident players wouldn't inhibit themselves before a game.  Performance equates to consistent paychecks.  

Edited March 6, 2020 by Lieutenant Aldo Raine

[Royale with Cheese]

Just now, Lieutenant Aldo Raine said:

I personally don't give one iotoa about weed; I don't smoke the stuff.  That said, I also don't have a problem with weed if it helps with pain and doesn't inhibit their performance on the field.  But from what I understand, excessive consumption (like alcohol) can inhibit motor function, and I feel confident players wouldn't inhibit themselves before a game.  Performance equates to consistent paychecks.  

 

That's the keyword....excessive.  

[Mr. WEO]

36 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

You’re missing my point. They will TRY to use this as a negotiating chip but both sides know that’s a bluff. The PR spin from the player’s would be so strong it would make the league look foolish. “They say that they care about player safety yet they hand out opioids like candy. Roughly 47,000 people die each year from opioid overdoses. The NFL has decided that’s a safer route for us as players. Do they care about us? They talk a big game but their actions say otherwise.” 
 

The league looks bad in 2020 suspending guys for weed. That’s just the way that it is. They know that. That is where we differ. You believe that the owner’s think it’s good for business. They don’t. They don’t like the idea of losing talent for something widely accepted and legal in MANY places. They get criticized for their position. Their league looks like it has a bunch of addicts when they are no worse than other leagues on the subject. Making it go away is what’s best for the owners and players. 

 

I don't think it's good for business.  And the NFLPA has wanted this.  Since there is no evidence that the NFL was going to stop testing before this final CBA proposal was leaked a little while ago, then why do you keep insisting that this is what the owners have wanted all along?  Again, if that was true they could have stopped at any time if they were truly concerned that the league has a "bunch of addicts" and hate the idea of losing talent (the number of suspensions per year ruin both arguments anyway).  Why didn't they?  Why now?

 

And as for players "spin"....come on!  The "handing out opioids like candy" (and Toradol, etc) is an OLD story that have gained zero traction over the past few years.  None.  Bringing that old trope up again would fall on deaf ears in the public (as they already have).   The public doesn't care.  They will reply: "you don't have to take the opioids".  You overestimate the general fan's tolerance for millionaires playing games whine about not being able to get high when they want to because they test at work.

 

Plus, it's hard to take active players' battle cry of "player safety" when we see them trying to or just incidentally nearly ending their colleagues' careers with cheap shots, late hits, head shots.  And their union with a history of fighting testing for PEDs.  They have little credibility as aggrieved parties.

 

31 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

Yours aren't guesses?  Do you know for sure that the majority don't smoke?  You can state that as a fact?

 

There's a long way from "majority" to "90%".

 

The NCAA reported in 2009 26.7% of football players admitted using in the previous 7 months.  A few years ago, an NFL GM put it at 30% in the league.  Bennett came in as the outlier at "89%".