If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Orlando Sentinel)   Why Florida State should not have dismissed its leading cornerback for marijuana, explained by their head coach. "What if somebody told everybody in this room that you can't drink a beer again or you're going to get fired?"   (articles.orlandosentinel.com) divider line 65
    More: Obvious, Florida State, cornerback, head coaches  
•       •       •

1096 clicks; posted to Sports » on 13 Aug 2012 at 10:57 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



65 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-13 02:31:40 PM

Confabulat: Confabulat: You can buy fake pee at the store you know.

Oh wait, your name suggests you live in Alabama. You probably can't, or a dildo either.


Sure you can. They market it under the brand name "Bud Light"
 
2012-08-13 02:36:05 PM

DrewCurtisJr: lennavan: Junior outside linebacker Chase Vasser must sit out the first two games of the season after he was arrested on charges of driving under the influence and for driving in an improper lane in Atlanta on May 11.

Link

Yes but this seems to indicate that this may not have have been the first time for Reid and that it may not be policy to kick a guy off the team for a single violation.

FTA: There has been rampant speculation that Reid may have surpassed FSU's three-strikes-and-you're-out university policy for testing positive for marijuana.



Fair enough. I just happen to echo this exact sentiment from TFA:

Full disclosure: I don't smoke pot although I do like to have a couple of beers on occasion. But even the most avid beer lover can't deny that booze is much more destructive than bongs.
 
2012-08-13 03:14:26 PM

bluorangefyre: Mugato: Someone thinks that people involved in college football should be above the law? This is unprecedented!

What'd you expect from the Criminoles?

/hey NCAA: take away some of Bowden's wins too!


Is a Gator fan actually calling FSU "Criminoles"? HILARIOUS (not to mention really innovative). You know UF has led the NCAA in player arrests the last decade, right?

Also, Bowden did get wins vacated. For a cheating "scandal" that FSU self-reported and that the NCAA admitted that neither Bowden nor anyone else in the school's administration knew about.
 
2012-08-13 03:35:59 PM

FLMountainMan: bluorangefyre: Mugato: Someone thinks that people involved in college football should be above the law? This is unprecedented!

What'd you expect from the Criminoles?

/hey NCAA: take away some of Bowden's wins too!

Is a Gator fan actually calling FSU "Criminoles"? HILARIOUS (not to mention really innovative). You know UF has led the NCAA in player arrests the last decade, right?

Also, Bowden did get wins vacated. For a cheating "scandal" that FSU self-reported and that the NCAA admitted that neither Bowden nor anyone else in the school's administration knew about.


*cheating on an online music test...as an alumn, that revelation made me blush
 
2012-08-13 03:43:13 PM

malaktaus: Mr Guy: Kome: you tested positive for cannabis.

That's the problem, and why we can't currently legalize weed. As bad as blood alcohol testing is, there's at least some vague correlation between the results and the difference between drinking now, and had a drink yesterday. We currently don't have a good quick relatively inexpensive test for the difference between smoked weed before you pulled me over, and smoked weed last Sunday. That's what the pro legalization people need to address if they really want weed to break the barriers nationwide. You need a guy in a white coat explaining MADD can still execute people for driving under the influence, even if the definition for under the influence has no basis in science or reality.

That is a nonsense issue. First of all, people are already smoking and driving, and it's pretty questionable that legalization would lead to a significant increase in stoned driving. Second, what about all the people who drive under the influence of prescription drugs? You know, the kind that state clearly on the label, "Do not drive or operate heavy machinery?" Do the concern trolls have anything to say about this (rather serious and increasing) problem, or is it just weed they're worried about? I think you know the answer to that. Every time a reason for prohibition is debunked, instead of admitting they're wrong they invent something new to lie about. That is all this is.


Serious question, can you think of any legitimate or rational reason why cannabis should remain prohibited?
Note: I'm not asking if you think the cons outweigh the pros, or anything else. Just, can you think of any good reason why cannabis should remain illegal?
 
2012-08-13 03:47:09 PM
I hate the people that just shrug and say "well it is illegal." Stop being a brainwashed complacent prick. Look at why its illegal, who made it that way and what methods they used. If supporting unjust laws, paying 50k a year each for millions of stoners to be in prison and denying an industry that can help stimulate the economy well you are poor excuse for an American and a human being.
 
2012-08-13 04:04:19 PM

barefoot in the head: Lyonid: //it's still a perfectly reasonable position to choose not to break a law in order to avoid the consequences associated with being caught breaking said law.
///that is in no way the same as "suspending individual judgement". quite the opposite.
////sla-sla-sla-slashy!

Read the post into which you jumped and look for a reference to the police. You won't find one. Krymson Tyde claims that deferring to his employer's judgment, and thereby denying his own (beyond the premise that acquiesence = survival), is "adult". If you discuss his use of that word in terms of fact-versus-value judgment, you will be addressing the point. I have already made mine.


My, but you are tiresome.

A discussion of decriminalization (which term was indeed originally referenced) can't ignore the consequences associated with law breaking.

One can lose one's job for failing a drug screening. One can also lose one's job for being convicted of a crime (common for felonies, but employees have been dismissed for lesser convictions) and certainly for being unable to see to one's job duties due to incarceration.

I interpreted Tyde's original statement as tacitly linking the legal status of marijuana with employment consequences (whether directly as with a conviction resulting in dismissal or indirectly as with the employer's proscription arising specifically from the legal status of marijuana). You apparently see no such link and instead consider Tyde to be senselessly abandoning his own judgement in the matter and yielding solely to the will of his employer. While I disagree with that premise, I would nonetheless find it entirely reasonable for one to weigh the losses associated with potential dismissal from employment vs. the gains associated with marijuana use. Perhaps you would not.

Alas, as interesting it may have been initially, this discussion has lost its charm.

If you like, go ahead and interpret that as me throwing in the towel.

/last post is the WNNAR!
//you know you want to
 
2012-08-13 04:06:16 PM
While I agree with his sentiment, it saddens me to think that a way to gain real traction for legalization could be through a sports angle.
 
2012-08-13 04:06:32 PM

elguerodiablo: ...paying 50k a year each for millions of stoners to be in prison...


There aren't millions of "stoners" in prison.
 
2012-08-13 05:07:20 PM
This thread brought to you courtesy of William Randolph Hearst and Harry Anslinger:

"Marijuana leads to pacifism....Marijuana is the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind."
 
2012-08-13 05:28:11 PM
I believe the coach was comparing the arresting circumstances of a minor amount of marijuana to an open container DUI.

Drunk drivers should be shot on site, but that's just my opinion.
 
2012-08-13 07:42:47 PM

dj_spanmaster: National Merit Scholars don't bring in tens of millions of dollars per year.


Research money is the biggest source of revenue at any university, except for those with hospitals.

Top students and research dollars go together well, though this tends to happen more at the graduate level, where the students actually do research themselves. (So do the best undergrads, though, so it's not as if Nation Merit scholars don't contribute to the research budget.)

This is not nearly as visible as athletics, but it's far more important. It doesn't dispel the illusion that the football team pays for everything else at most schools, though.


When I was an undergrad, the only major sport that did not have a massive budget deficit was basketball, which more or less broke even every year. The football team contributed to a ten million dollar budget deficit. I suspect that this is the case at most schools.

Apparently, the football team now breaks even, too, though, but it certainly isn't making money.

Moreover, at most schools, a large chunk of the revenue athletic departments receive comes from student fees (paid by, among others, the National Merit scholars).

It appears that, at most schools, even the undergraduate students bring in a lot more money than the athletic programs, and this is definitely the case for the graduate students.

This is not even debatable. At most schools, the athletic departments do not turn a profit.


Visibility is the reason athletes get more scrutiny. Not money.
 
2012-08-13 10:37:46 PM

NetOwl: This is not even debatable. At most schools, the athletic departments do not turn a profit.


I would genuinely love to see your citations for that, because that is not the case at the university I work for.
 
2012-08-14 02:06:42 PM

Kome: I would genuinely love to see your citations for that, because that is not the case at the university I work for.

Here's one that may help.

Link

You may be reluctant to divulge which university you work for, but is it comparable to, say, Texas, Ohio State, USC, or Nebraska? Then you're probably right, your athletics department turns a profit. But for the majority of schools, this is not the case (especially when you consider that the NCAA is much bigger than Div 1-A football).
 
2012-08-14 02:11:19 PM

pion: Kome: I would genuinely love to see your citations for that, because that is not the case at the university I work for.

Here's one that may help.

Link

You may be reluctant to divulge which university you work for, but is it comparable to, say, Texas, Ohio State, USC, or Nebraska? Then you're probably right, your athletics department turns a profit. But for the majority of schools, this is not the case (especially when you consider that the NCAA is much bigger than Div 1-A football).


Another link
 
Displayed 15 of 65 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report