Pot situation

[JRingo]

Anyone think that Seattle and Denver are the places to play because of the permisiveness? Does that play in to somes decision to go there? Curious as to what others think. My understanding is that the players are tested before the season starts but not during the regular season. Any experts here?

 

[Speedy]

Anyone think that Seattle and Denver are the places to play because of the permisiveness? Does that play in to somes decision to go there? Curious as to what others think. My understanding is that the players are tested before the season starts but not during the regular season. Any experts here?

If the NFL company says no, it doesn't matter if you're in a legal state or not.

 

[Wolf]

Duplicate

 

[Wolf]

Yep if I recall Home Depot says the same thing. You smoke some weed the night before and next day you are using the forklift and you drop a pallet of product (I believe if value is 500 bucks or more. Been a long time since I looked the.Value up) ..you will be marching down for a pee test. And if you have stuff in your system. You are fired on the spot.
2whether something is legal to do or not.

Corporate policy overrides it

 

[CloakNNNdagger]

Anyone think that Seattle and Denver are the places to play because of the permisiveness? Does that play in to somes decision to go there? Curious as to what others think. My understanding is that the players are tested before the season starts but not during the regular season. Any experts here?

According to the old CBA, offseason/preseason testing was a given. Only if positive, that player could be spot tested as determined by the league. The new CBA has introduced an additional facet to the policy. The offseason/preseason testing remains unchanged. But a positive test may very well make that player "testable" throughout the remainder of his career.......and now not only can the League demand testing, but individual team are empowered to obtain tests under the conditions of having "reasonable basis" for concern.

I was going to post the relevant CBA policy, but found this recent reference whih contains additional appropriate clarification.

CBA actually permits teams to drug-test players

Posted by Mike Florio on April 29, 2013, 12:47 PM EDT

At first blush, news of the Cardinals’ plans to impose drug testing upon safety Tryann Mathieu raised a red flag as big as any from Mathieu’s troubled time at LSU.

The league, not the teams, impose drug testing. The teams therefore can’t do it themselves, right?

Not so, according to the CBA. As pointed out to PFT by the NFLPA, the league’s substance-abuse policy allows teams to test players.

Here’s the relevant language: “An NFL club and a player may agree that such player will submit to unannounced Testing during the term of said player’s NFL Player Contract provided that the club has a reasonable basis for requesting such agreement. A Positive Test (as hereinafter defined) as a result of such Testing shall be reported to the Medical Director and shall result in the player’s entering Stage One of the Intervention Program. Once a player enters an Intervention Stage the number of Tests that a player will be required to take will be determined by the Medical Director or the Medical Advisor, as set forth herein – not by the terms of the player’s NFL Player Contract. Upon being dismissed from the Intervention Stages, a player’s NFL Player Contract will govern the number of Tests that he is subjected to. All such individually negotiated Testing shall be conducted under the direction of the Medical Advisor and not the club. In cases of individually negotiated Testing, the Medical Advisor and other Interested Parties will continue to be bound by the confidentiality provisions established by this Policy.”

In English, this means that a team can test a player, if the team has a “reasonable basis” to ask the player to submit to testing. The testing continues unless and until he lands in the substance-abuse program. At that point, the league takes over.

As to Mathieu, it’s entirely possible that he’ll enter the NFL as a member of the substance-abuse program, given his history at LSU. If he is, the Cardinals won’t be able to test him until he’s out of the program.

Ultimately, Mathieu has to agree to be tested as one of the terms of this player contract. As he tries to demonstrate that he is willing to choose football over marijuana, chances are that he’ll agree to be tested by the team.

Hope this answers most people's questions.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

In almost all cases that I know of where an athlete participates in some sort of federation or league, they are bound by that league's rules as to what they may or may not have in their body. Whether something is legal or not doesn't matter.

With federations like the AAU (which I've been in), this include things from pseudophed to cough syrups to steroids to steroidal precursors to too much coffee.

So, as everyone else has said, the legality of Pot doesn't make a difference. If you get caught with it in your system, you're going to be in trouble.