Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Worse: PEDs or Marijuana? « previous next »
Page: 1

BucFanMatt

*
Starter
****
Posts : 665
Offline
« : November 01, 2011, 10:31:21 AM »

Pat Yasinskas just posted the following on his blog:

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcsouth/post/_/id/26940/whats-wrong-with-this-picture

What's wrong with this picture?

November, 1, 2011

By Pat Yasinskas
A week ago, we told you New Orleans defensive end Will Smith was not on the ballot for the Pro Bowl. We also told you Tampa Bay safety Tanard Jackson is on the Pro Bowl ballot.

Both players were suspended at the start of the season. Smith missed the first two games of the season. Jackson missed the first five games before his suspension, which started last year, came to an end.

When I first saw Smith wasn’t on the ballot, I thought it might be because of his suspension. But, then, I saw Jackson was on the ballot, so I was thinking Smith’s suspension had nothing to do with his absence from the ballot.

But it turns out Smith and Jackson fell into different categories on this issue.

Bradley Handwerger got clarification from the NFL on the matter.

“Any player suspended for a violation of the league’s policy on anabolic steroids and related substances will not be eligible for selection to the Pro Bowl,’’ an NFL spokesperson said. “Tanard Jackson was suspended for violating the NFL policy and program for substances of abuse.’’

So let me get this straight. Smith was suspended for testing positive for the diuretic Star Caps, which was billed as a weight-loss supplement. When Smith first tested positive in 2008, Star Caps were commonly sold at health food stores, although the Food and Drug Administration later declared the product unsafe.

Jackson was suspended for just more than a year for violating the league’s substance-abuse policy. He also was suspended for the same thing once before. So we know Jackson failed at least two drug tests.

The problem I’m seeing here is it doesn’t seem fair that Jackson’s on the ballot and Smith isn’t.

Although the supplement was banned by the NFL at the time Smith tested positive, it was not illegal. The substance Jackson was using was illegal and his suspensions showed he used it at least twice.

I’m not saying Smith was right in using a banned supplement, but he wasn’t breaking the law. Jackson was.

If the rule was the other way around and Smith was on the ballot and Jackson wasn’t, I could understand that. But, at least to me, it sure looks like the NFL got this rule backwards.

Oh, by the way, I checked out the details of Smith’s contract. His absence from the ballot could cost him a nice chunk of change. Smith has an incentive clause that calls for him to get a $250,000 bonus each time he’s selected to the Pro Bowl.

\"Those who would trade freedom for security deserve neither\" -- Benjamin Franklin

BucFanMatt

*
Starter
****
Posts : 665
Offline
« #1 : November 01, 2011, 10:33:07 AM »

Here is the response I sent him:

Pat, in regards to your comments on why Will Smith was excluded from the Pro Bowl Ballot, and Tanard Jackson was not, I totally disagree.  Smith cheated whether you believe it was intentional or not.  That hurts every player that adheres to the rules. 

Tanard Jackson violated the NFL's personal conduct policy.  In so doing he hurt his team, his fans, and most of all himself.  But marijuana isn't a performance enhancing drug.  Other players don't feel pressure to use marijuana to keep up with Tanard Jackson.

Striking Jackson from the ballot could be justified as a punitive measure, but striking Smith from the ballot isn't just punitive, it is necessary to maintain a sense of competitive fairness.

\"Those who would trade freedom for security deserve neither\" -- Benjamin Franklin

All The Way Tampa Bay

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 5340
Offline
« #2 : November 01, 2011, 10:34:24 AM »

Medically I think Diet pills are worse than marijuana. Medically marijuana is actually very useful unlike other things such as alcohol and cigarettes (which are worse for you than marijuana)


bradentonian

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 27605
Online
« #3 : November 01, 2011, 10:35:57 AM »

Here is the response I sent him:

Pat, in regards to your comments on why Will Smith was excluded from the Pro Bowl Ballot, and Tanard Jackson was not, I totally disagree.  Smith cheated whether you believe it was intentional or not.  That hurts every player that adheres to the rules. 

Tanard Jackson violated the NFL's personal conduct policy.  In so doing he hurt his team, his fans, and most of all himself.  But marijuana isn't a performance enhancing drug.  Other players don't feel pressure to use marijuana to keep up with Tanard Jackson.

Striking Jackson from the ballot could be justified as a punitive measure, but striking Smith from the ballot isn't just punitive, it is necessary to maintain a sense of competitive fairness.


Well-said


grefly

****
Starter

Posts : 442
Offline
« #4 : November 01, 2011, 10:56:16 AM »

Here is the response I sent him:

Pat, in regards to your comments on why Will Smith was excluded from the Pro Bowl Ballot, and Tanard Jackson was not, I totally disagree.  Smith cheated whether you believe it was intentional or not.  That hurts every player that adheres to the rules. 

Tanard Jackson violated the NFL's personal conduct policy.  In so doing he hurt his team, his fans, and most of all himself.  But marijuana isn't a performance enhancing drug.  Other players don't feel pressure to use marijuana to keep up with Tanard Jackson.

Striking Jackson from the ballot could be justified as a punitive measure, but striking Smith from the ballot isn't just punitive, it is necessary to maintain a sense of competitive fairness.

Excellent, and I totally agree. Surprised he didn't see it this way.

BucNY

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 7763
Offline
« #5 : November 01, 2011, 11:50:36 AM »

Agreed with all above and initially it is what I was thinking as well. Both are bad but one makes the player better, skews stats and compromises his stats and team wins. Getting high is just stupid, doesn't make you a better football player.

\\\\\\\"This forum needs a poster like BucNY now more than ever\\\\\\\"
      - Everyone

TBayXXXVII

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5809
Online
« #6 : November 01, 2011, 11:53:09 AM »

PED's are definitely worse.

buccaneer4ever

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5110
Offline
« #7 : November 01, 2011, 06:37:49 PM »

PEDs all the way. There's no logical reason for marajuana to be illegal at all, especially when things like nicotine, alcohol and caffeine are readily available.


lyronmewis

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4091
Offline
« #8 : November 01, 2011, 07:14:17 PM »

Marijuana doesn't increase performance, but then again, neither does a diuretic. Both should be eligible.

ryan24

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 10700
Offline
« #9 : November 01, 2011, 11:24:11 PM »

BucFanMatt wrote an excellent response. The NFL doesn't want a guy playing in the Pro Bowl who is perceived as possibly playing with an advantage. I think players who are on the PED list are also eliminated from post season awards. That came from Shawe Merriman finishing 2nd or 3rd for DPOY after the season he was suspended for 4 games.

Happy and Peppy and Bursting with love.

JDouble

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 29156
Offline
« #10 : November 02, 2011, 08:42:49 AM »

When you are speaking strictly in reference to the honor of being voted best among your piers and elected to the Pro Bowl by voting based on your performance, marijuana has no effect whatsoever. Performance enhancing drugs do directly effect this though and it would be wrong to allow someone that is boosting their performance by cheating, to be judged along side players that have not cheated. The legality of each substance has no bearing on Pro Bowl voting. One is cheating and one isn't. Cheaters can't be in the Pro Bowl. Pretty simple. Surprised Pat couldn't figure this out.


GayRobot

User is on moderator watch listWatched
****
Starter

Posts : 479
Offline
« #11 : November 02, 2011, 10:38:11 AM »

Marijuana ruined my life... It caused me to lose my job, my house, and my wife. Ever since I took a "hit" off the marijuana reefer ive had serious health problems including uncontrolable violent siezures. I highly discourage anyone from experimenting with this dangerous narcotic and if you already have I fear it is already too late to save your life. God Bless

buchead

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2436
Offline
« #12 : November 02, 2011, 10:57:11 AM »

To me this article just showed pats love for the saints. Did you see how he ripped the saints in his post game article. He sounded like he was the coach of the team. PEDs stands for performance enhancing drugs. If you dont understand why Will Smith isnt eligible (pat) then your a saints fan. Its not even worth a debate. 

JDouble

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 29156
Offline
« #13 : November 02, 2011, 12:22:57 PM »

I guess pot effects robots differently than humans.


Benchwarmer#1

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 13006
Offline
« #14 : November 02, 2011, 03:43:24 PM »

I guess pot effects robots differently than humans.

Damn, that's funny....I wonder how it effects Trolls??



....Javaaaa! We need you out from under your bridge to test out the new Christmas Buds!

Naismith was right about Revis. Everyone else is a dummy.
  Page: 1
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Worse: PEDs or Marijuana? « previous next »
:  

Hide Tools Show Tools