- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What is the justification for drug testing football players for non-performance enhancing.
Posted on 8/10/18 at 2:48 pm to The First Cut
Posted on 8/10/18 at 2:48 pm to The First Cut
quote:
There's no advantage to one using weed.
i could argue that Brandon Harris might have been a little better had he been 'relaxed'
0
Posted on 8/10/18 at 3:01 pm to LSUGrad9295
quote:
Just like any other organization, the NCAA has rules that its members must follow. If you want to be part of the organization, the burden is on you to follow the rules. The NCAA has a list of things that are banned, some of which can be taken legally, and some of which can't. It is pretty simple. If you take a substance that is on the list, then you can't participate in the organization.
Why does the NCAA ban "illegal" substances?? Oh, I dunno. Maybe they don't want illegal activity in their organization? Just a guess.
Yalls reading comprehension skills fricking suck major truck nutZ.
This isnt a discussion about the merit of following organizational regulations.
Its a discussion about the value and justification of an organization, whos sole purpose to exist is to create and maintain an equal playing field for its member institutions, to have a regulation in place banning the use of substances that dont have ANY effect on said playing field.
Wurdz be hard.
quote:
LSUGrad9295
Figures.
"Went in dumb, come out dumb too."
This post was edited on 8/10/18 at 3:03 pm
Posted on 8/10/18 at 3:12 pm to LSUGrad9295
quote:
A student's standing in the NCAA is not a right, it is a privilege. Follow their rules or GTFO. I am not sure how this keeps getting past you.
No. Its a problem.
No public entity, like many NCAA participating Universities are, should be controlled or governed in any way by a non-public, or in this case, a 501(c)(3) organization.
These quasi-public/private organizations and partnerships skew the lines of legality and the intent and mission of public institutions. Its a way to skirt the rules and create untouchable fiefdoms out of the reach of public scrutiny and control.
If a student enters a public University and that public University offers extra-curricular activities, then every aspect of those activities should be managed and controlled by the University or Universities participating. Said student shouldnt be subject to rules, regulations and restrictions that arent within the full purview of the University they attend.
I dont care if private Universities want to create sanctioning bodies outside of the control of their respective schools but in the case of public Universities those bodies must also be under public funding and control just like every other University sponsored activity.
This post was edited on 8/10/18 at 3:18 pm
Posted on 8/10/18 at 3:20 pm to nola000
quote:
Yalls reading comprehension skills fricking suck major truck nutZ.
This isnt a discussion about the merit of following organizational regulations.
Its a discussion about the value and justification of an organization, whos sole purpose to exist is to create and maintain an equal playing field for its member institutions, to have a regulation in place banning the use of substances that dont have ANY effect on said playing field.
Wurdz be hard.
Thank you!!!
Posted on 8/10/18 at 3:23 pm to tigbit
quote:
Thank you!!!
youre welcome.
and 3 DVs right out the gate just reaffirms my assertion of the poor grasp the members of this board have on the English language.
Posted on 8/10/18 at 3:28 pm to nola000
quote:
and 3 DVs right out the gate just reaffirms my assertion of the poor grasp the members of this board have on the English language
Nah, I just think it reaffirms that you are being a dickhead about it and several posters noticed it.
But you be you.
Posted on 8/10/18 at 3:30 pm to dgnx6
quote:
The purpose of the drug-testing program is to deter student-athletes from using performance-enhancing drugs, and it impacts the eligibility of student-athletes who try to cheat by using banned substances.
Perfect. This should be the goal. One and only.
quote:
Member schools also may test for these substances as part of their athletics department drug-deterrence programs.
Member schools can and should be able to do whatever their students, constituency and revenue providers(the public) want.
quote:
The NCAA tests for steroids,
Good.
quote:
peptide hormones
Good.
quote:
and masking agents year-round
Good.
quote:
and also tests for stimulants
Good.
quote:
and recreational drugs
Whoaaaaa. Put the fricking brakes on. This is where they over step their bounds. "Recreational" drugs, unless found to enhance the performance of the athlete, should not be of any concern to the NCAA.
Posted on 8/10/18 at 3:32 pm to LSUGrad9295
quote:
Nah, I just think it reaffirms that you are being a dickhead about it and several posters noticed it.
But you be you.
Nah.
I think it means Im right and you and your ilk are wrong and none of you challenging or even addressing my points is how Ive reached that conclusion.
But you just keep burying that head and deflecting.
This post was edited on 8/10/18 at 3:33 pm
Posted on 8/10/18 at 3:43 pm to tigbit
Public perception and reputation risk. What do I win?
Posted on 8/10/18 at 3:45 pm to nola000
quote:
Whoaaaaa. Put the fricking brakes on. This is where they over step their bounds. "Recreational" drugs, unless found to enhance the performance of the athlete, should not be of any concern to the NCAA.
at the risk of repeating myself:
Kristian Fulton was not being tested for weed. He thought he was, and panicked.
Ironically, had he simply accepted what he thought his fate would be, 1 year suspension for testing postive for weed, he could have peed in the bottle, and gone home, only to find out at a later date that he passed the test and would not have any suspension.
Posted on 8/10/18 at 3:56 pm to Cosmo
quote:
Its not that difficult. Free tuition, free room and board, opportunity to make millions in nfl and one of the few things you have to do is not smoke weed. Dumbasses still smoke weed.
You ever smoked weed?
It’s fricking great.
It’s not illegal everywhere.
Posted on 8/10/18 at 3:57 pm to Air_Raid7
quote:
What's the justification for using drugs, when you know it can terminate your eligibility?
Because drugs are great when used responsibly.
Posted on 8/10/18 at 3:58 pm to tigbit
Because it's still fkn illegal. Are you serious?
Posted on 8/10/18 at 4:00 pm to tigbit
I see no justification at all for testing for non-performance enhancing drugs. I do not see why it's legal to drink alcohol and not legal to smoke weed.
Posted on 8/10/18 at 4:02 pm to beauxroux
quote:
Pretty sure it's scientifically accepted that drunk/high people have slower reaction times and their inhibitions are lowered making them dangerous risk takers and more likely to get injured.
Then why are they not testing right before games?
Posted on 8/10/18 at 4:03 pm to Dave England
quote:
at the risk of repeating myself:
Kristian Fulton was not being tested for weed. He thought he was, and panicked.
Ironically, had he simply accepted what he thought his fate would be, 1 year suspension for testing postive for weed, he could have peed in the bottle, and gone home, only to find out at a later date that he passed the test and would not have any suspension.
Im well aware, Dave. Relax.
I wasnt responding specifically to the Fulton case but was speaking in general regard to the NCAAs policies.
Posted on 8/10/18 at 4:17 pm to nola000
quote:
quote: and recreational drugs Whoaaaaa. Put the fricking brakes on. This is where they over step their bounds. "Recreational" drugs, unless found to enhance the performance of the athlete, should not be of any concern to the NCAA.
I don't disagree with you one bit here, but this doesn't have anything to do with Fulton and the current state of affairs. Fulton cheated because he thought he was going to be tested for weed. He cheated the test on this false premise and was busted for cheating.
Posted on 8/10/18 at 4:17 pm to beauxroux
quote:
Some might say there is a safety issue involved. Pretty sure it's scientifically accepted that drunk/high people have slower reaction times and their inhibitions are lowered making them dangerous risk takers and more likely to get injured.
Lol no. Drunk maybe, the rest is propaganda long ago debunked.
Posted on 8/10/18 at 4:21 pm to Philippines4LSU
Posted on 8/10/18 at 4:53 pm to tigbit
Drug testing is flawed in college football. Just about every football player smokes weed and a lot of it too. They really don’t care that much about pot trust me
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News