Random Commanders Thoughts

[Win4us]

I thought the way the NFL did it was to have the individual report to the nearest hospital or wherever to provide a sample? Had no idea they came to your home to do so...sounds strange and improper indeed.

Shoulda clarified on my stance...approve of random testing but for these guys they should get to go to facility to do so.

I wouldn't put it past that skunk scrotum Mara having something to do with this. I seriously can look at him easily and see all evil in the world.

 

[fansince62]

I thought the way the NFL did it was to have the individual report to the nearest hospital or wherever to provide a sample? Had no idea they came to your home to do so...sounds strange and improper indeed.

Shoulda clarified on my stance...approve of random testing but for these guys they should get to go to facility to do so.

I wouldn't put it past that skunk scrotum Mara having something to do with this. I seriously can look at him easily and see all evil in the world.

I was just referencing the fact that coming to a private residence AT ALL is ridiculous. that's police state type of stuff.

agree whole heartedly on Mara - not sure why the fans don't start an anti-Mara chant on national TV during a game. were I a season ticket holder I'd be leading the charge!!!! a pox on Mara and everything associated with him.

 

[Om]

Has anyone seen any mention anywhere of how common it is for the NFL go do random testing at private homes? Could it perhaps be that's been SOP for a long time, agreed to by both sides, and the only reason we're talking police state here is because Cousins tweeted about it?

That's an honest question by the way. If it is NOT common, and Cousins was strong armed into it, and gramma really is traumatized, and Mara's reach grows more and more insidious, and the Post's mission statement really is to 1) bring down the Redskins and 2) bring down conservatism, I will be front and center with my pitchfork and torch.

 

[Elephant]

... and the Post's mission statement really is to 1) bring down the Redskins and 2) bring down conservatism, I will be front and center with my pitchfork and torch.

Welcome aboard.

 

[Om]

You give them way too much credit. They care about one thing---advertising revenue. They will pursue that goal by any means necessary. The Redskins and conservative politics in a liberal area are simply low hanging fruit.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

I thought the way the NFL did it was to have the individual report to the nearest hospital or wherever to provide a sample? Had no idea they came to your home to do so...sounds strange and improper indeed.

Shoulda clarified on my stance...approve of random testing but for these guys they should get to go to facility to do so.

I wouldn't put it past that skunk scrotum Mara having something to do with this. I seriously can look at him easily and see all evil in the world.

Has anyone seen any mention anywhere of how common it is for the NFL go do random testing at private homes? Could it perhaps be that's been SOP for a long time, agreed to by both sides, and the only reason we're talking police state here is because Cousins tweeted about it?

That's an honest question by the way. If it is NOT common, and Cousins was strong armed into it, and gramma really is traumatized, and Mara's reach grows more and more insidious, and the Post's mission statement really is to 1) bring down the Redskins and 2) bring down conservatism, I will be front and center with my pitchfork and torch.

RE: Drug testing - Cooley blogged about it one time, and he was somewhere random (EDIT: Found it, he was at the Borgata in Atlantic City). But I think regardless of where he was, he blogged that it was S-O-P for them to show up anywhere at any time, and its the players' responsibility to be ready to go, so to speak. Now, showing up at Grandma's house unannounced might be slightly bizarre, but its possible they called him to find out where he would be, and he scheduled it there.

As you can see from the Cooley blog, he made "10 phone calls" to arrange the meeting - so Kirk probably had a similar experience.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Does anyone else cringe when fans use the term 'Redskins Nation'?

I can't stand that. I have probably used the term myself - so please don't search for it and embarass me. Redskins Nation? We ain't the Ray-duhs people.

Naw, Redskins Nation is fine IMO. So is Chiefs Nation, Broncos Nation, etc. Are we supposed to find different synonyms to describe every fan base? Some do...like the infinitely clever "Dolphans" in Miami </sarcasm>, but not all do (As far as I'm aware.)

 

[Fear The Spear]

Does anyone else cringe when fans use the term 'Redskins Nation'?

how about Redskins Tribe ?

 

[TomE]

Another random thought.....

Bubba Tyer, the Redskins’ long-time athletic trainer, met a man on the golf course not long ago who said he helped carry Joe Theismann off the field that night in 1985 when the Washington quarterback suffered a gruesome broken leg injury during a game against the New York Giants.

“I said, 'You did? Who are you with?’ ” Tyer recalled recently. “He says, 'No one. I just jumped out of the stands and helped carry Joe off the field.’ Sure enough, I dug out pictures and there was this one guy helping with the stretcher and we had no idea who he was.”

Ran across this article in WPost about NFL medical
improvements over the years , apparently the Skins are ahead of the curve.

 

[servumtuum]

JetNation, VikingsNation, BleedingGreenNation (Eagles), NinersNation, ...etc.

In my Redskins Recon travels, I've noticed that many if not most of the NFL teams seem to have at least one fan forum including the word "Nation" in the title.

It's pretty commonplace, actually.

 

[fansince62]

several points:

- it shouldn't be happening in random places. the notion in play is random times.

- testing should be conducted in controlled spaces with standard procedures - including chain of custody

- are the tests...errrr.....observed?

going to grandma's crib is a blatant over-stretch of power IMO. somewhere along the line this gets into 4th Amendment territory - it's someone's friggin home!!!!

 

[Lanky Livingston]

several points:

- it shouldn't be happening in random places. the notion in play is random times.

- testing should be conducted in controlled spaces with standard procedures - including chain of custody

- are the tests...errrr.....observed?

going to grandma's crib is a blatant over-stretch of power IMO. somewhere along the line this gets into 4th Amendment territory - it's someone's friggin home!!!!

-well, random times often leads to random places. If a player is across the country, should he be forced to fly to NY to the league offices for a drug test at the drop of a hat?

-These procedures have led to several players getting off, so I agree here. There are testing facilities all over the country, not sure why they can't meet at one of those. We could avoid the chain of custody issues that have come up recently in MLB testing, and the silly "broken cup defense" that Richard Sherman employed.

-Yes, if you read the blog, Cooley is rather graphic about the testing procedures. I believe this is a result of the Minnesota RB who got famous for being caught in the airport with a "Whizzinator," which is a fake johnson that clean pee came out of. Very elaborate set up!

 

[Om]

Al, the NFL ain't the military or law enforcement. It's a business that negotiated a contract with it's employee union that agreed to the procedures. Should 'someone' take up the cause to force different procedures on them?

 

[Bulldog]

What is a performance enhancing substance has taken on such a wide definition that players are now having to answer for taking Sudafed or Triaminic in some sports.

Truthfully a LOT if items we consume regularly could be dosed up or modified for another purpose.

50 years ago things like cortisone shots or electronic stimulators would have been thought of things giving individuals an unfair advantage.

In some ways we are chasing ghosts.

 

[TomE]

Polumbus is supposedly back, per espn 980 guys

 

[fansince62]

Al, the NFL ain't the military or law enforcement. It's a business that negotiated a contract with it's employee union that agreed to the procedures. Should 'someone' take up the cause to force different procedures on them?

OM...I'm not being combative here.

1) There are rules for everything in life.

2) In my book: going to someone's home/a private residence in order to enforce workplace rules is beyond the pale. It's BS, an intrusion on privacy and symptomatic of an over-reaching NFL leadership.

3) It may not be the military here - but the consequences can be the same: loss of the means of making a living, damage to reputation, etc.

There is also a notion of fairness in all of this. Are they going to everyone's private residence at one time or another - or are only a few being singled out?

 

[Om]

I have no issues with you wanting Al's Rules of Order installed as the universal constant.

I'm just saying that's not what the parties in question agreed to. I see no injured party here.

I'm also asking if you think some outside entity 'should' force change upon the parties?

 

[servumtuum]

I have no issues with you wanting Al's Rules of Order installed as the universal constant.

I'm just saying that's not what the parties in question agreed to. I see no injured party here.

I'm also asking if you think some outside entity 'should' force change upon the parties?

Let's see, first sentence-I made my peace with that quite a while ago myself.

Second sentence-I understand this position but I don't necessarily agree with it. I think fansince makes some very pertinent and compelling arguments that lead into my response to the third sentence.

Third sentence-the courts have declared technically legal agreements to be fundamentally in violation of an individual's constitutional rights at times so if you want a viable "outside entity" capable declaring "null and void" the interpretation of the agreement that assumes nothing problematical exists, well, there's a plausible example.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Third sentence-the courts have declared technically legal agreements to be fundamentally in violation of an individual's constitutional rights at times so if you want a viable "outside entity" capable declaring "null and void" the interpretation of the agreement that assumes nothing problematical exists, well, there's a plausible example.

Well, the courts have already upheld completely illegal agreements for the NFL, so I'm not sure the legal ones have an ice cube's chance in hell.

 

[Om]

fair enough serv....the question remains though. Do we want the courts sua sponte taking the NFL to task for Cousins whizzing in a cup at grandmas? And if the courts won't who should?

For the record, my answers are no and nobody.