rdsknbill Posted June 28, 2003 Share Posted June 28, 2003 Originally posted by Flowtrain Leon Lett was reinstated after missing 8 games, despite testing positive for a "harder" drug, staying clean for a shorter amount of time, and not "missing" a test as some have suggested Evans did. Both players were in identical phases of the substance abuse program. We can only expect Tags will handle Evans' case based on Lett's precedent and hand down a similar result. The Jets aren't the Cowboys and their owner isn't Jerruh Jones. Keep the "Spin" cycle at full speed Flow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flowtrain Posted June 28, 2003 Share Posted June 28, 2003 Originally posted by rdsknbill The Jets aren't the Cowboys and their owner isn't Jerruh Jones. Keep the "Spin" cycle at full speed Flow. Huh? Are you suggesting that Lett got preferential treatment because his team led the NFL in substance abuse violations? That's an interesting spin. I trust the NFL attempts to remove bias from the equation, but if you insist that's not the case, you should probably consider the fact that Evans' coach is regularly hand-picked by the Commish to speak on the league's behalf. The team, owner, or coach will make no difference here - the precedent has been set. Originally posted by JimboDaMan Flow, if they're already going to punish him then that's a foolish statement for him to make. They say he's guilty and he continues to claim otherwise? Even if he really is innocent, its almost asking for an increased punishment. Depends. If Evans did test positive, I agree with you. Even if he is telling the truth and was the victim of a rare false positive, the NFL would only view his statement as evidence of a lack of remorse and it would weigh against him. But if Evans did miss a test (as various media outlets still speculate), and a lie detector was taken regarding circumstances of the missed test, then his statement may be helpful. Lie detector tests are far less reliable than confirmed drug tests. But if I just took millions away from a guy who passed a polygraph saying he was clean, somewhere in the back of my mind I'd have to wonder if I did the right thing. In the final analysis, however, a guy with multiple strikes against him loses his right to the benefit of the doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted June 29, 2003 Share Posted June 29, 2003 Frankly, who gives a shlt if the guy smoked a joint. Christ, these guys are football players,, not airline pilots. Seriously,, I understand that the policy is the policy, and it has merit, but good grief. it's just a goddam joint. What, he can't rush the passer on Sunday cause he caught a buzz on Friday? The law in most places anymore doesn't see fit to ruin his life for it, why should the NFL? ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brandies Posted June 29, 2003 Share Posted June 29, 2003 Originally posted by Bang Frankly, who gives a shlt if the guy smoked a joint. Christ, these guys are football players,, not airline pilots. Seriously,, I understand that the policy is the policy, and it has merit, but good grief. it's just a goddam joint. What, he can't rush the passer on Sunday cause he caught a buzz on Friday? ~Bang Ditto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly Posted June 29, 2003 Share Posted June 29, 2003 if i'm Dewayne Robertson's agent, i'm lickin' my chops right now ~ ~ ~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJWatson3 Posted June 29, 2003 Share Posted June 29, 2003 bang, i agree 100% with your post... especially when all you hear from the government is about how drugs make you perform worse (viagra and 'roids not included)... if a guy wants to use drugs it should give every other player an advantage if what they feed us is the truth... let him use them... same rule should apply to all sports, not just for football players. and one odd thing about the whole Evans case... if the guy has "never smoked or used marijuana" how the fu(k did he fail previous drug tests...? is he so incompetent as to miss two scheduled screenings in the past and now a third? is that what we are supposed to believe? otherwise their is a conspiracy against him. or else he is a liar. which do you think?:gus: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted June 29, 2003 Share Posted June 29, 2003 Originally posted by AJWatson3 bang, i agree 100% with your post... especially when all you hear from the government is about how drugs make you perform worse (viagra and 'roids not included)... And cocaine and methamphetamine and hundreds of other things that temporarily enhance one's performance or can cause sudden death. But POT? Good grief, it's no worse than a few beers. Imagine if the NFL had been such hardasses back in the old days on BEER for pete's sake. Imagine, Sonny Jurgensen and Billy Kilmer RUN OUTTA the NFL for drinking beer. I can see merit for the NLF wanting to be clean, and their own policy is indeed their own policy. Jurgensen's a hall of fame QB who was occasionally bailed out of jail on gamedays so he could play. Dick Butkus on the other hand, would he be an NFL Hall of Famer, loaded up on the highlight reels,, if the NFL had taken away all his bennies and uppers? I get so sick of the sanctimonious crap surrounding all of this. You drunks and pill poppers,, get over there and get your picture taken with the fans. ... you joint smokers, get the hell out of here. ~BangonaSoapbox harangue harangue! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Funbuncher Posted June 29, 2003 Share Posted June 29, 2003 Bottom line is less talent we have to line up against week 1, which is nice. Now if you don't mind, I am going to indulge in our last legal drug, except for caffiene and nicotine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted June 29, 2003 Share Posted June 29, 2003 the Jets have had a rough offseason. of course Jets fans will tell you all is fine and nothing to worry about, but the other teams in their division have improved themselves while NY to me is probably not as good of a team now as it was at the end of last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted June 30, 2003 Share Posted June 30, 2003 Originally posted by Bang Frankly, who gives a shlt if the guy smoked a joint. Christ, these guys are football players,, not airline pilots. Seriously,, I understand that the policy is the policy, and it has merit, but good grief. it's just a goddam joint. What, he can't rush the passer on Sunday cause he caught a buzz on Friday? The law in most places anymore doesn't see fit to ruin his life for it, why should the NFL? ~Bang On the other hand, when your employer is paying you millions, MILLIONS of dollars to play a game, and all they ask is that you not smoke pot for a few years, how freaking stupid do you have to be to do it? And how stupider do you have to be to blame anyone but yourself for getting suspended afterwards? I mean, if we are going to start ranting here, lots of employers ask you to take drug tests. I had to take one for my job and I get payed about 1/100th of the money Evans gets. That's life. That's being a responsible adult. And if Evans doesn't like it, he can wait tables, or sell shoes, or do about a thousand other things for other employers out there who don't care what he smokes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted June 30, 2003 Share Posted June 30, 2003 Originally posted by Henry On the other hand, when your employer is paying you millions, MILLIONS of dollars to play a game, and all they ask is that you not smoke pot for a few years, how freaking stupid do you have to be to do it? And how stupider do you have to be to blame anyone but yourself for getting suspended afterwards? I mean, if we are going to stat ranting here, lots of employers ask you to take drug tests. I had to take one for my job and I get payed about 1/100th of the money Evans gets. That's life. That's being a responsible adult. And if you don't like it, find another job. Sheesh. i thoroughly agree.. the rules are the rules, and should be lived within. I guess i am just tired of the witch hunts. Our jails are full and our courts are thoroughly backlogged because of relatively minor drug offenses for relatively minor drugs. I'm more ****ing about the policies in this nation more than the fact that this Evans guy got canned. I've taken tests before as well for certain employments, and when employed for those companies, I kept clean. It's kind of the social contract. Now, i am my own boss, and i don't think I shall be peeing in any more cups to keep my job. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted June 30, 2003 Share Posted June 30, 2003 Originally posted by Bang i thoroughly agree.. the rules are the rules, and should be lived within. I guess i am just tired of the witch hunts. Our jails are full and our courts are thoroughly backlogged because of relatively minor drug offenses for relatively minor drugs. I'm more ****ing about the policies in this nation more than the fact that this Evans guy got canned. I've taken tests before as well for certain employments, and when employed for those companies, I kept clean. It's kind of the social contract. Now, i am my own boss, and i don't think I shall be peeing in any more cups to keep my job. ~Bang I get that. I don't really have a problem with pot-smoking in general, though since I don't do it I don't really care if it's legal or not. But I do think that while I many find the NFL drug policy a bit strict, I also find NFL wages rather generous. The balance of these two societal abberations weighs heavily in the players favor, in my opinion, so I won't be crying for NFL drug policy violators any time soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted June 30, 2003 Share Posted June 30, 2003 Originally posted by Henry But I do think that while I many find the NFL drug policy a bit strict, I also find NFL wages rather generous. The balance of these two societal abberations weighs heavily in the players favor, in my opinion, so I won't be crying for NFL drug policy violators any time soon. Very good point. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.