Is Roger Gooddell going over the line? [Archive] - Wildcat Nation Forums - Kentucky Wildcat Discussion and News

PDA

View Full Version : Is Roger Gooddell going over the line?


DCWildcat
07-26-2007, 06:31 PM
Odell Thurman's being suspended a second season. After assault charges were previously dropped, this means he's being suspended for two consecutive seasons for a DUI and a positive drug screen. Anyone else think this is way over the line? In no way do I condone those activities, but they should be punished reasonably, and almost as importantly, consistently with other cases. Nobody I've ever heard of in the NFL has done so little to deserve such a harsh punishment. And while I applaud Gooddell's efforts to crack down on this kind of stuff, little-to-zero tolerance policies implemented after a culture of more leniency have been shown by research to result not in better behavior, but in less likelihood of violations being reported.

I.e., if the number of players caught with positive drug screens goes down, it's generally not because players are doing less drugs--it's because they're cheating much more, or the people responsible for the reports aren't doing so because they don't feel the player should be punished.

TransientAlum
07-26-2007, 07:56 PM
Anything short of a lifetime ban is too lenient.

How many jobs can you keep after popping positive?

DCWildcat
07-27-2007, 10:14 PM
Anything short of a lifetime ban is too lenient.

How many jobs can you keep after popping positive?

Nearly all, if you're not in a government, military, or medical job, or work in a high-security area (e.g., airport). Drug testing is actually in the middle of a rapid decline, because research shows that those who test positive show up to work, get fired, get raises, and get promotions at the same rate as those who are negative. More and more businesses are starting to view it as a needless expense that could preclude potentially good employees.

Sports is different, as many psychoactive drugs have immediate and significant results on physiological performance, while they wouldn't have meaningfully significant results on many other jobs. Personally, I don't care what non-performance enhancing drugs they test positive for, so long as the performance-enhancing ones are tested for, and have positives penalized.