Apparently Williams has failed a drug test, reportedly for marijuana. According to reports, it's his second failed test, the first coming when he was a Saint.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=1802049

He still has one more failed test to go before the automatic suspensions kick in, and he's appealing the latest test.

No truth to the rumor that he started smoking pot when he realized that AJ Feeley would be the Dolphins' starting QB next year.

Another idiot athlete. Whatever :rolleyes:

Weed? Who cares.

I tried to warn him, but the man loves the bong like a 7th grade tuba player likes tubas. On his lips.

So instead of a slap on one hand, he gets both hands slapped? Oooooh.

Weed? Who cares.


But it is such a huge performance enhancing drug! :rolleyes:

But it is such a huge performance enhancing drug! :rolleyes:

It's hard to understand why they even care about this. They should demonstrate that it actually provides an unfair advantage in the game before they make a policy against it. That's just my opinion.

We already know that the government lies about it when it comes to explaining why it is illegal anyway.

I don't think the NFL has ever taken the position that marijuana is a performance enhancing drug.

I don't think the NFL has ever taken the position that marijuana is a performance enhancing drug.

Then why have any policy regarding it? It must only be due to political pressure applied from the outside.

But it is such a huge performance enhancing drug! :rolleyes:


I know a guy who should be in the Pro Bowl every year.

lol surtt

I know a guy who should be in the Pro Bowl every year.


I actually had a friend in high school who would smoke a bowl before he played, he also tried several other things before games on different occasions, like speed, acid, and shrooms.............he always played best on the weed though or speed though. SO i guess it did work for him, or he could have been even beter without it......

Then why have any policy regarding it? It must only be due to political pressure applied from the outside.Why have any sort of personal conduct policy? If all you're worried about it performance enhancing drugs, then why go after guys like Leonard Little or Michael Pittman?

I can fully understand the NFL wanting to discourage players from using an illegal and (arguably) harmful drug. I think you could make a good case that it should fall under the personal conduct policy and not the drug policy, but the end results would still be generally the same.

I think you could make a good case that it should fall under the personal conduct policy and not the drug policy, but the end results would still be generally the same.
There ya go.

Yeah, the NFL drug policy prohibits performancing enhancing and illegal drugs. It doesn't ban alcohol or ciagarettes, for example. Other than The Friends of Mary Jane Society, most people would think it odd if not ridiculous if the NFL prohibited some illegal drugs but not others. That would be seen by some as a tacit endoresement.

Plus, unlike NBA owners, NFL owners are smart. If I'm going to pay a guy few million dollars a year, I don't want him playing on the weed any more than I want an air traffic controller getting the munchies.

Yeah, the NFL drug policy prohibits performancing enhancing and illegal drugs. It doesn't ban alcohol or ciagarettes, for example. Other than The Friends of Mary Jane Society, most people would think it odd if not ridiculous if the NFL prohibited some illegal drugs but not others. That would be seen by some as a tacit endoresement.

Plus, unlike NBA owners, NFL owners are smart. If I'm going to pay a guy few million dollars a year, I don't want him playing on the weed any more than I want an air traffic controller getting the munchies.
Good point made by kcchief19. We've all seen the anti-marijuana commercials, and no owner would want someone like Rickey Williams going to jail for a long time for running some little kid over after going through the fast food drive thru or hitting a random light post because he was high. That just wouldn't be a wise investment. : p

Just tell your teammates the December collapse which led to your team missing the playoffs was because you were too busy getting high.

I read that his first test barely hit league minimum score for a positive and the second was below minimum, low enough it could have been a contact high. If the scores were that low you can bet he'll lawyer out of it.

...and then continue to smoke pot and be around it?

The weed policy is all about image. A weed-free NFL sells better than a pothead NFL. Of course, that's due to the fact that Mr. and Mrs. America are, for the most part, hypocrites.
However the fact that it doesn't make much sense that people buy into it doesn't change the fact that it's true.

Maybe I should type the word "fact" in this post one more time.

...and then continue to smoke pot and be around it?
I'd say that's one of the safest bets I've seen in quite a while.

But remember:
1) It ain't addictive http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/%7Efof/forums/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif
and
2) It doesn't really make you stupid http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/%7Efof/forums/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

I think people misuse the word hypocrite

But remember:
1) It ain't addictive http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/%7Efof/forums/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif
and
2) It doesn't really make you stupid http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/%7Efof/forums/images/smilies/rolleyes.gifWhy the rolling eyes (at least for #1?)

Well, now I understand why Williams always sounded like a dumbass to me.

Why the rolling eyes (at least for #1?)
Umm ... "he goes right back to it" ... "but it's not addictive".

(kinda like the old Richard Pryor bit about "I ain't hooked ... you can't get hooked on no coke)

Then why have any policy regarding it? It must only be due to political pressure applied from the outside.

Maybe because it's illegal, and the NFL frowns upon its employees doing illegal things.

I think people misuse the word hypocrite

I think so too. But in this case it fits. A fair percentage of the people running around America have smoked weed. Most people who haven't don't think particularly less of their friends and acquaintances that have. But they let it affect their purchases in regards to sports leagues.

I'll also add that knowing that your favorite musician or actor was into much heavier stuff has rarely stopped people from purchasing their products.

Most people who haven't don't think particularly less of their friends and acquaintances that have. ... has rarely stopped people from purchasing their products.
I'll take any source materials you might be able to offer to back up those opinons, especially the first one.

I'll take any source materials you might be able to offer to back up those opinons, especially the first one.
Come on, Jon, you know that everyone does it. I guess my company's zero tolerance for drugs is a typo.

I'll take any source materials you might be able to offer to back up those opinons, especially the first one.

I've never smoked anything and I don't think less of anyone that has. What someone wants to put into their own body (and live with the consequences) is their own business.

Come on, Jon, you know that everyone does it. I guess my company's zero tolerance for drugs is a typo.

Friend and acquantaince is different from employee. I don't have any polls. I'm talking about myself and most people that I know. Personally, I don't smoke anything and tend to think less of people who do. That's why it stands out to me that most people aren't like me.

Maybe because it's illegal, and the NFL frowns upon its employees doing illegal things.

If it is a legal question, call in the legal authorities.

I never have, but I don't have a problem with consenting adults doing it, as long as they don't then do anything that could harm a non-consenting adult. It all goes out the window if a minor is around. I don't agree you should be smoking up when you have a kid that is currently in your care.

Beyond that, I don't give a damn about it and don't know why anyone would. I would have less of a problem with it if it was considered 'personal conduct policy' rather than 'drug policy', which seems to indicate that it has some effect on the game. I am of the opinion that these policies should be determined by each particular owner, rather than the league...but that might be hard to deal with due to the union.

... and don't know why anyone would.
I'm going to take that statement at face value & offer a quick insight --
because, above all else, the rule of law is required for any society to remain functioning. And nothing destroys the rule of law like disobedience.

There's a school of thought that seems to say "if you don't like a law then it's okay to ignore it".

If that's how we're gonna play it then fine, but only if I get to apply the same principle to the laws that I don't like.

And believe me, there's gonna be a lot of really unhappy people if I start disobeying the laws I don't care for (starting with the U.S. Treasury Dept & the IRS).

I'm going to take that statement at face value & offer a quick insight --
because, above all else, the rule of law is required for any society to remain functioning. And nothing destroys the rule of law like disobedience.

Disobedience goes on all of the time, and a good amount of it done by the people who are supposed to be enforcing the law. If every agent of the government obeyed every single law, I would certainly be willing to change my tune. You don't have to try very hard, though, to see police breaking a handful of traffic laws on any given day. It's a little hard to respect that.

My problem is why such a law was even enacted. My opinion is that it should not be against the law to posess marijuana, or even use marijuana. It should only be against the law to harm others while using marijuana. Much the same as alcohol. Merely drinking alcohol is not a crime (assuming you are 21), but getting drunk and driving around town or stumbling about town acting like an ass *IS* a crime. Why should it be treated any differently?

All my politics aside on this matter, the NFL can test for anything they want. I'm not saying they should not be allowed to set these policies, but I am saying that it doesn't make any sense to me. If they think somebody is doing something illegal, they should call the police. Otherwise, let it go unless it is giving them an unfair advantage on the playing field. Any sports organization should keep to their 'game' and away from the rest of the lives of everyone involved. I'm also of the opinion that you should be able to do anything you want off-the-clock, as long as you are sober enough to safely and effectively do your job when on-the-clock. Screw it up, and you're out the door. No fines. No "treatment programs." Show up too high to work, and you are simply terminated.

But it is such a huge performance enhancing drug! :rolleyes:
You mean eating Doritos and playing Playstation doesn't help him break 1500 yards?

SI

I'm also of the opinion that you should be able to do anything you want off-the-clock, as long as you are sober enough to safely and effectively do your job when on-the-clock.
Kinda like your "If every agent of the government obeyed every single law, I would certainly be willing to change my tune" though ...

As a business owner, I'll give you that "off-the-clock, your-business" thing ... as soon as you can fix it so that a screw-up off the clock doesn't have a negative impact on the image of my business.

(and believe me, if I have an employee busted for possession, or worse, that has a negative impact on the image of my company & likely would directly effect its bottom line rather quickly).

Most people who get arrested don't make the news and almost nobody finds out about it, even in drug arrests. Given the situation with your business, I find it very unlikely that any of the fulltime employees will find themselves in a position like that. ;)

Nobody can 'fix it' so that an off-the-clock screw-up does not affect the image of a business. I would say, of the places I have worked, there has never been an issue with off-the-clock drug-related incidents that has had any effect on the companies (and as far as I know, there have not been any incidents). At one of them, we routinely had beer on site, and went out for beers with the CEO and President, and there were never alcohol related incidents that painted the company in a bad light either. Go figure. Investors and customers often toured the place and didn't find the atmosphere objectionable either, and we were profitable as well. I suppose you just have to be able to find people who can handle a certain level of personal responsibility who will not put themselves into situations that could damage themselves or their employer.

If these drugs were not illegal, and only abuse of them that infringed the rights of others were criminal, being responsible with them would not result in an arrest. Someone who is reckless with their drugs could become pretty obvious to you, as their employer, well before the authorities catch onto them.