Jeffress suspended 100 games

[TakebackOPACY]

Ignoring the whole legalization debate... when did Brandon Snyder count as a glut of upper minor league position prospects?

Haha. It struck me later on that I had used the wrong word or said it backwards! I just hadn't corrected it, yet. Apparently it went overlooked until you caught it. Milwaukee has a shortage of upper minor league pitching. The O's have a shortage of upper minor league position players.

[Migrant Redbird]

... 42% could easily be the majority if there are more than two choices.

Uh, I think the term for that is "plurality", not majority.

[byrdz]

Uh, I think the term for that is "plurality", not majority.

So "majority", or whatever you want to call it, doesn't always rule. I think this is the point I was trying to make. Thanks for correcting me though.

[TJ Wrangler]

Ok. Well Joba got a DUI this off season. He wasn't suspend at all. This kid is going to get a 100 day suspension for smoking weed. How does that make sense?

Well he is a repeat offender or the suspension wouldn't be so high, but I agree 100% that it's not fair, but for different reasons. Joba should have been suspended too.

[TJ Wrangler]

If you do it in a way that impacts your performance or effects the public perception of the team, well, yes.

If you do it in privacy, and in a way that does not impact your performance, then that's total BS.

What Wedge said. No matter how much you like it or hate it, the law is the law and the rules are the rules. What he did and got caught for multiple times was unprofessional.

[TJ Wrangler]

No, see, this is where I disagree, even though I'm a proponent of legalization.

Fact: It's illegal, period, to use.

Fact: It's illegal by the leagues own mandates.

To get caught doing a "doubly" illegal thing is simply inexcusable. Even if I think it's BS, the law is the law and the rules are the rules. He doesn't get brownie points for doing something illegal that I think should be legal. I'm afraid life doesn't work that way.

Fact: Drunk Driving is illegal.

Fact: Drunk Driving is not specifically illegal by league mandates.

So, what we have here is a disconnect that I agree needs to be addressed, but again...the law is the law and the rules are the rules. There is currently no rule in pro ball that says DUI = auto suspension. There is for illegal drug use.

So, I have to agree with Justin that doing something that is both illegal and against the rules is incredibly unprofessional. I wish it were otherwise, but wishes and farts will get you a stinky room.

Well put. Gotta rep this post.

As far as actually doing the drug goes, if I were a team owner, GM, or coach, I'd rather my players spend their free time training a little harder, positively representing the organization, and doing things to maintain positive relationships with their friends and loved ones than doing drugs or drinking.

I don't know, I guess I just hold athletes to a higher standard because of my love for the game and since I was a former player.

[TJ Wrangler]

You only have to get 8% of the people that are still against legalizing marijuana to get the majority. That isn't hard to do with a strong campaign.

I wasn't talking about the contract. I simply said it was sad that MLB actually test for weed. I was corrected that the MLB doesn't test for it, but the MILB does. Which I think is pretty damn stupid since marijuana has no effect on a players abilities or health for that matter.

TyCobb, I respect your point of view and as a student of criminal justice and hopeful State Trooper, I have been exposed to and understand all sides of this issue. That said, wouldn't you prefer your athletes to be doing more productive things like I outlined in another post?

[QBsILLEST1]

Right now many of the suppliers are shipping the very best reefer to California for medicinal purposes, the govt is already taking control over the game. Regardless, there is money to be made with reefers but your gangs dont base their livings for the msot part on reefer. Atleast most operations that ship out here dont. The good stuff comes through indian reservations through Canada(for the most part) through normal every day guys like you and me and is distributed to normal every day guys as well.

The regul;ar stuff that comes from Mexico may be associated more with the whole gang thing, but gangs dont make any more $$ off of it than you or me would. They do not need weed to thrive, of course there are some gang members who are way up the chain in the distribution of it, but there are also normal people up the ladder as well. The only ones getting super rich are the king pins. You can make really wonderful money off of selling it, but not like the guys who sell more hardcore stuff, and thats what gangs are msotly associated with, weed is more of a throw in to make extra money.....Kinda like the Bedard trade and Butler. He wouldnt make or break the deal, but why not take him if hes available to us...like how I associate it with baseball?

[varugby]

Actually I've heard that the best way to get weed out of your system is with a whole bunch of alcohol!

the only way not to test possitive is to not smoke it.

[byrdz]

Sometimes I wonder if the person who writes some of these "rules" isn't high themselves and I'm only half joking.

The bottom line, it's bad business for baseball teams to have players getting caught doing illegal drugs and the stigma surrounding it, this is the only reason for the testing. It's also bad business to decriminalize certain drugs but that's more off topic. Either way, it's all about money and benefiting the person making the rule, simple as that.

The league wasn't thinking of the players own well being or the well being of others when they implemented these rules, or they would create rules that address conduct like drinking and driving that happens to claim thousands of lives each year, can't say that about marijuana. The "rules" are clearly outdated and some rules are just plain dumb.

There's my rant.

[The Wedge]

So is driving over the speed limit or downloading music from P2P software but everyone have done that at some point. Rhetorically speaking, are you not an equally irresponsible person for breaking any law, no matter what it is? I'd say no, personally.

Well, my point, and the reason why I said "period", was that marijuana is illegal outright. Alcohol consumption, while regulated, is not. And it's not illegal to download music, just to do it without paying for it. And it's not illegal to drive a car, as long as you're licensed and follow the motor laws.

Plus, there is a certain amount of irresponsibility inherent in doing drugs in a profession where mandatory drug testing is the norm.

[byrdz]

Well, my point, and the reason why I said "period", was that marijuana is illegal outright. Alcohol consumption, while regulated, is not. And it's not illegal to download music, just to do it without paying for it. And it's not illegal to drive a car, as long as you're licensed and follow the motor laws.

Plus, there is a certain amount of irresponsibility inherent in doing drugs in a profession where mandatory drug testing is the norm.

But marijuana is not outright illegal, many people use it for medical reasons, that's reality. Granted, those same people aren't playing professional sports so this doesn't give them a reason to do it.

My point of bringing up illegal music downloads and speeding is that they are as commonly broken laws as smoking weed, there's a double standard, but probably bad examples.

[The Wedge]

But marijuana is not outright illegal, many people use it for medical reasons, that's reality. Granted, those same people aren't playing professional sports so this doesn't give them a reason to do it.

My point of bringing up illegal music downloads and speeding is that they are as commonly broken laws as smoking weed, there's a double standard, but probably bad examples.

Allow me to amend my statement: You don't need special dispensation like you do to use marijuana.

[RShack]

I don't see why corporations have any right to go snooping around in the bodily fluids of employees to spy on what they do on their own time, unless it has some obvious direct bearing on job performance. Lately, it seems like all the stuff we associate with totalitarian government behavior is suddenly just fine and dandy if a corporation does it to their employees, or even their customers. It's a new version of a police state, but this time around it's a corporate-police state. Unions used to prevent this kind of crap, but we mostly don't have unions anymore, so it comes down to, "Want a job? Fine. Sign here and give up your basic rights to us."

In keeping with this, it seems that the word "libertarian" has been hijacked to mean something way, way different than it used to mean. It used to be all about actual people having liberty and right to privacy. Lately, it's been turned into a very dark bizarro version that's mainly concerned with making excuses for letting corporations (a word which cannot be found anywhere in the Constitution) doing whatever the hell they want to actual people. Live and let live no longer applies to human beings, because so-called libertarians are preoccupied with ensuring that corporate priorities come first. IMO, it's another case of taking a valid principle, but twisting and warping it out of all recognition to anything human.

[The Wedge]

They have the right because there is absolutely no guaruntee that they aren't using while on the clock.