Califan007 The Constipated Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 I would. I don't think that's necessarily the case with Jackson, though.Why is it a performance enhancer? In my opinion, and my opinion only, there are some pains that impact your ability to play at a high level. If a doctor didn't prescribe a painkiller to you, they didn't see it as a necessity. Taking one anyways greatly increases your ability to play despite nagging pain in the short term. However, in the long term it also allows you to further injure yourself and effect your quality of life without your body's natural response to pain giving you a warning to impending danger. So it's a slippery slope. It's certainly not a performance enhancer in any direct sense. It's the indirect sense that makes it an "iffy" proposition. Hell, then wrapping up a hurt ankle is a "performance enhancer" lol...getting shots is as well...RG3 hopping around on one leg at the end of the Ravens game was him using a performance enhancer because had he put his entire weight on his injured leg he would have crumbled to the ground in agony and thus not played nearly as well lol ... Hmm...home field advantage is a "performance enhancer", too...slipper slope indeed. :paranoid: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doghouse4x4 Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 This has gotten totally absurd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 Yeah, then cortizone is a performance enhancer as well... motrin, bananas, green tea, turkey breast, vaseline, preperation H, toe nail clippers, food, water, gatorade, toilet paper, onions, and low calorie fiber one bars. Again, it's dependent on the situation. And what's in these drugs. You know that. Hell, then wrapping up a hurt ankle is a "performance enhancer" lol Not the same thing. Wraps are used to compress the injury. They aren't ingested. They aren't a "drug". ...getting shots is as well...RG3 hopping around on one leg at the end of the Ravens game was him using a performance enhancer because had he put his entire weight on his injured leg he would have crumbled to the ground in agony and thus not played nearly as well lol ...Hmm...home field advantage is a "performance enhancer", too...slipper slope indeed. :paranoid: You're obviously not interested in a real conversation... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doghouse4x4 Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 Goodell was quoted as saying "Just for ****s and giggles"... Ha. Win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC9 Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 Again, it's dependent on the situation. And what's in these drugs. You know that. No doubt, but based on your last post, everything I listed there would be considered performance enhancing. It's interesting that they went with the PED route. Codeine is a controlled substance by the DEA (schedule II, I believe), I am only guessing here, but if they went with the "recreational drug" route would he not have been suspended because this would be his first pop? I don't know his history, but from what I've heard, you get what? three or four chances at recreational use before a 4 gamer? But PED is immediate? **** your couch Mara/Goodell. Just something to ponder on for those of you out there who don't think the league may be giving us the shaft when they feel necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 No doubt, but based on your last post, everything I listed there would be considered performance enhancing. Sure, in some way. But if they aren't on the banned substance list, does it matter if they're performance enhancing or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringEmBacktoDC Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 This has gotten totally absurd. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandyHolt Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 Did Brett Favre get suspended? Or is he the reason why Jackson got suspended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brettstr Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 Maybe, but for whatever reason its Redskins players that seem to fall prey to getting busted more than other teams. Have any of our division rival players lost a single player to a 4 game suspension? Good point. Hate to join the conspiracy theory, but there are a lot of things beginning to look suspect around here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogofWar1 Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 I think arguing whether a painkiller is a PED or not is an issue that, I suspect, is/was/and will be lost on the NFL. This is an organization that is organized so poorly that Richard Sherman got off on a technicality, and suspended Jordan Black despite the fact that he had a prescription. I would not be surprised if the NFL simply said that he failed a drug test for a banned substance, labeled it a PED, and called it a day. Now, to Jackson "hurting" or "not hurting" the team, with his suspension, this is an interesting case. Consider how Jackson played last year, quite well, considering he came in as a backup. He made plays at critical moments, and showed himself to be a jack of all trades at the linebacker position. So, why then, did he return on a one-year deal, and while we don't know the numbers, possibly a cheaper one than the original round tender, and likely below the 2nd round tender? I don't think it's too far-fetched to think, considering Alexander got 9.5M/3Y, that Jackson could have gotten 6M/3Y or something. It is quite possible that his return was actually helped by his suspension, and thus it might be better to look at this from a sort of glass half-full perspective; Jackson didn't hurt the team by getting suspended for 4 games, Jackson helped the team by returning for 12. No team is going to give a guy with a 4 game suspension coming up a long term contract, or even a decent 1 year deal. Jackson, if he didn't play here, was likely looking at being a mid-season, vet min pickup, a situation that is not conducive to success in this league. By returning here, even on the cheap, he's giving himself 12 games to get on the field and recover the value he lost. So, while, yeah, the suspension sucks, and for his sake and ours I had wished he hadn't done it (even if the suspension itself is suspect) I'm not too angry about this one, he basically killed his own value and had to come back to us on our terms, which, considering the tight cap we were under, was practically a lucky break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brettstr Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 This is how drug testing works in just about all sports not just the NFL - the athlete is responsible for what they put in their bodies on season or off season. If this test fail was caused by Rob using an unapproved and non prescription pain relief medicine he is dumb. Period. I agree with protocols being set in order to balance competition, but there has to be a reasonable and sound protocol to not only protect the players but show some kind of latitude with that testing. Surely labs can distinguish substance,amount and longevity of a substance. If the NFL is not using state of the art techniques which are out there, they should. Players should be given the benefit of the doubt especially first time offenders. Innocent until proven guilty by second and third timers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 You're obviously not interested in a real conversation... Is there a reason you left off the "wrapping a hurt ankle" part? lol... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 Is there a reason you left off the "wrapping a hurt ankle" part? lol... Uhhh... I answered it. Go back and read the whole post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 Part of me really wonders how the NFLPA agreed to this type of a thing where nothing you take is legal and there's not even a trial or any way to argue a case. I know in any other line of work this wouldn't hold up. Shoot, I wonder if it would hold up in other sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 Uhhh... I answered it. Go back and read the whole post. No, I meant when you quoted me...oy vey. *Edit: oh, wait, I see what you did there lol (smacking forehead)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 No, I meant when you quoted me...oy vey. It's in the post. I quoted that, responded under it, and then quoted the rest of your post and then responded under that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 It's in the post. I quoted that, responded under it, and then quoted the rest of your post and then responded under that... Read my edit :thumbsup: And you're saying it's only a "performance enhancer" if it's ingested? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 And you're saying it's only a "performance enhancer" if it's ingested? Eh, not necessarily. It depends. Common sense has to prevail. I don't think this is a black/white topic, to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC9 Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 Sure, in some way. But if they aren't on the banned substance list, does it matter if they're performance enhancing or not? That's the point I'm trying to make, though. How do they determine if something is performance enhancing vs recreational? If I am understanding the ruling correctly, you get 1 strike for PED use, but 3 to 4 for recreational use? You could argue that codeine is more of a recreational drug (tuss, sizzurp/drank, boat) more typically used for recreational purposes... especially the last 10 years or so. The chopped hip hop songs were actually created so that people who are on "tuss" or "drank" could listen to it while they drive and not be so choppy on the roads, because if you are under the influence of that, chopped hip hop sounds like it's normal speed. Regular music would sound like chipmunks singing or the old cassette tapes being fast forwarded. So again, how is it performance enhancing > more than recreational? Something is aloof here unless Rob has two or three hot tests for THC or the like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 Good question. One I certainly can't answer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 Eh, not necessarily. It depends. Common sense has to prevail. In the NFL?...Good luck with that lol... I don't think this is a black/white topic, to be honest. Hey, now...let's not bring race into this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brandymac27 Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 No doubt, but based on your last post, everything I listed there would be considered performance enhancing.It's interesting that they went with the PED route. Codeine is a controlled substance by the DEA (schedule II, I believe), I am only guessing here, but if they went with the "recreational drug" route would he not have been suspended because this would be his first pop? I don't know his history, but from what I've heard, you get what? three or four chances at recreational use before a 4 gamer? But PED is immediate? **** your couch Mara/Goodell. Just something to ponder on for those of you out there who don't think the league may be giving us the shaft when they feel necessary. This, IMO, is the bigger issue. If it was a painkiller for a toothache (something like T3, vicodin, etc) then it would make sense to fall under the recreational drug category, as most people know who have taken those drugs they knock you out on your ass. Now, if the info we have is wrong and it's not a pain medication for a toothache (HGH/Whatever) then yes it should be classified as a PED. It matters to me b/c (if you're correct) and the time of suspension in the NFL varies according to whether or not a drug is listed as recreational or performance enhancing, this should have been classified as a rec. drug and he possibly could have gotten off w/ a warning of some sort instead of a 4 game suspension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laxpunk2006 Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 You don't need a medical degree to know that most prescription-strength painkillers are sedatives, or that sedatives aren't "performance enhancing" A guy I was friends with in college use to take prescription pain killers before his lacrosse games. He didn't have a preexisting injury it was just so he wouldn't feel checks during games and could more easily run through traffic. I don't know why it even matters if its listed as PED or just banned substance. He took something he wasn't suppose to knowing full well he is responsible for what goes in his system. What is there to debate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 In the NFL?...Good luck with that lol... Good point. Hey, now...let's not bring race into this. Well played! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrecker Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 Read my edit :thumbsup:And you're saying it's only a "performance enhancer" if it's ingested? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.