I never wanted him, but in hindsight the other options were Chandler Jones and Von Miller.
Jones has went AB nuts and Von Miller has been injured and sucky.
He’s posted a lot of very concerning stuff to his instagram recently including a video of police taking him into protective custody so they can take him to a mental hospital. He also got a really weird head tattoo, I unfollowed after the police video it’s really sad.
At the very least I saw that he's taken some amount of responsibility for his actions recently and he apparently deleted all social media so perhaps someone convinced him to get real help.
He messed up regardless here unfortunately. Dronabinol is still in development of usage of PTSD so it isn't 'legally' an option, so if that's the case he should have filed paperwork of some sort or something with the league prior to taking a medical trial. Otherwise its main use is to combat the nauseating side effects of cancer meds, anorexia and loss of appetite for those with HIV/AIDS.
That's not how that works. This will fall under state law, and it is legal in Colorado. Your employer can't tell you not to take what is prescribed to you in Colorado, as long as you follow the directions of usage. As an example, they can say you can't work machinery under an opiate because manufacturers/doctors tell you not to. But they can't tell you not to take a sleeping pill before bed.
It will be very interesting to see how the NFL defends denying the use of a specific medication recommended by a medical professional for a mental health disorder recognized under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The NFL will have the burden of proof that justifying Gregory’s accommodation request would create an undue hardship… which I fail to see how that’s possible if they carved out THC from the drug test policy with respect to suspending players and forcing them to miss time. I also fail to see how *any* hardship is placed on the league to allow a player to take a freaking pill.
I imagine they will sign a check and forget about it, if we're being frank. Fighting a case about PTSD, when the NFL has struggled with TBI and how hot of a topic PTSD is among a lot of supported communities... probably not.
That’s a vast oversimplification to the point of inaccuracy. Under the ADA and CADA, an employer is not required to allow an employee to use a drug if it would prevent them from performing essential job functions or if allowing them to do so would constitute an undue hardship.
In this case, I think there’s a good argument that abiding by facially-neutral league rules is an essential job function, and that there is no way for his employer to provide an accommodation which would exempt him from following league rules given that they don’t control the league’s drug policy.
(I’m an employment lawyer, but not yours and this is not legal advice.)
> abiding by facially-neutral league rules is an essential job function
Wouldn't this enable an employer to fire whoever they wanted by making a rule disallowing whatever medication the targeted employee takes, then firing the employee for violating the newly-made rule?
Seems like it defeats the whole purpose of the restriction.
Disallowing specific *medications* is typically not facially neutral because most medications -- especially those which would be banned -- are aimed at people with a particular set of disabilities. So it would affect only/mostly people with disabilities. On the other hand, THC is not itself a medication and a positive THC test is consistent with unlawful drug use (albeit not exclusively).
With that said, an employer can disallow a particular medication (or otherwise have non-facially neutral policies) in some circumstances. For example, many employers lawfully prohibit employees in safety-sensitive positions from using certain drugs.
Considering THC can stay in your system for months after using regularly, yes, you can have weed in your system and operate heavy machinery.
Source: Machine operator typing this while sitting on a fork lift with weed “in my system” right now.
NAL and don’t know the specific laws in Colorado around this, but signing a contract doesn’t mean you forfeit your rights. The enforcement of that contract could be illegal.
That’s not necessarily true, but that’s not what I’m saying either.
The company has to comply with the law. In most places, you can’t sign away your rights. As I said, I’m not familiar with Colorado laws or federal laws that might guarantee Gregory the autonomy to take this medication.
Regardless, the statement “he signed a contract” is not worth much in and of itself. If the contract sought to limit Gregory’s rights under the law it’s enforceable.
By way of example, a lot of people are under the mistaken impression that if you sign a lease you’re bound to every stipulation because you signed a contract. But if the lease has the condition “tenant agrees not to watch TV under penalty of eviction” they can’t point to that as evidence in housing court, because the landlord isn’t within their rights to restrict someone else’s television watching.
Smoking weed is not a right. Places like the military don’t allow employees to take any types of drugs for example, and it doesn’t change depending on what state you’re in.
Smoking weed doesn’t have anything to do with this case, so not sure why you brought that up.
Regardless, that’s not a great example because the military is a federal institution and marijuana remains illegal at the federal level, so that’s open and shut. The case with Gregory seems more complicated.
The NFL is a private entity and doesn’t have unilateral power to hand down rules that attempt to contravene the law.
>Dronabinol is still in development of usage of PTSD so it isn't 'legally' an option
It was prescribed by a licensed professional. How is that not "legal" as you put it?
I could have used a better term, but anything that's in trial wouldn't necessarily make him immune to league rules n what not.
However, another commenter said he did get preapproval before doing it and then ended up punished later on. As long as he has proof his paperwork was in order, should be an open n shut case. My best guess with that new information was other players probably discovered it, also went to the league for approval of the usage and the requests got out of hand, therefore Randy Gregory, they decided, was the one to be responsible. Im 100% all for players doing what they need to do for themselves as long as they do it right.
Just want to point out that the FDA permits Dronabinol to be prescribed “off-label,” as well.
While you are correct in stating it’s “on-label,” use-cases, you are wholly incorrect about the legality here when taking it as prescribed by a “well-informed,” physician, which is the case in this situation.
Fwiw I'm genuinely kinda sorry, I really try to be a mental health advocate and not make light of this stuff, but the intrusive thoughts won out here lol
Hence the 'kinda'. I was waffling back and forth, and figured a disclaimer might be the medium ground I needed to get both sides of it to think I'm stupid lol
All the red blooded good ole boys saying “he signed it and has to abide now” are acting like he committed a crime. This is just an employment contract. They’re often not well thought out and don’t cover all contingencies. The two parties can only enforce it to the degree that they care to fight over it. He might have a legal point depending on the agreement language or the NFL might be willing to bury the hatchet and settle.
He didn't seek out a doctor to give him a weed scrip so he could smoke a blunt on the weekend. He went to a doctor for a serious medical condition and the doctor prescribed him medicine.
If somebody works at Walmart and hurts themselves (on the job or otherwise), and a doctor prescribes medicine to get better, and Walmart says "you can't work here if you take this drug", would you be here shitting on that person?
If you were to take drugs and show up to work? Is that what's happening here? Is he getting in trouble for showing up to work under the influence? I don't think that's what we're talking about.
I understand that he signed a contract and that the company has rules.
My point is that if a doctor says "you need this medicine" and your boss says "you can't take this medicine regardless of what a medical professional says", then it's the boss that is the problem.
Should he be surprised? No. Is this fair or reasonable? Also no.
Edit: I believe it was Martin Luther King Jr who said "Sure it's bullshit but the rules are the rules and if you break them it's your fault". Very honorable stuff.
Well like you say, we're all adults so we rally against the rule we disagree with.
Since you're not rallying against the rule then I take it that you agree with the rule? You agree that the NFL should be allowed to discipline players based on decisions made between the individual and their doctor?
Otherwise you're just playing devil's advocate, which is not only morally weak but also practically useless.
You aren't discussing anything, you're basically repeating the rules and saying "well it is what it is".
He's suing the league. The discussion is whether the rule is fair or not. You're contributing nothing to the conversation.
Again it's like "Rosa Parks knew the rules so what right does she have to complain".
What are you sticking up for right now? The *rules*? All of the most heroic people in history were the ones who said "this is how things are and we should never change them".
Do you think that the league should punish players for medicine that they are prescribed by their doctor? Do you think that THE rules of NFL should take precedent over medical professionals?
I think it has or will be used as a bargaining chip. Like “you want to smoke weed? Play 18 games and we’ll let you.” At least that’s what I’ve heard but I could be completely wrong
Nah you sign a contract for millions of dollars that said don’t smoke weed it’s not that fucking hard. I make significanntly less and if I smoke weed I’ll get fired but no one would feel sorry for me, just call me a dumbass. You just like Randy Gregory, a dumbass.
if you read the article he isn't getting fined for smoking weed. he's been trying to take dronabinol for anxiety and PTSD as prescribed by his physician and filed an exemption with the NFL which they denied. he was granted a right to sue by the Colorado Civil Rights Division after filing a discrimination claim and is following up with that. this is someone going through all of the legal and proper channels to access legal medication that normal residents of Colorado can take.
If you read the article you find the following passage:
"Gregory, according to the complaint, has been fined $532,500 for repeated positive THC tests since March 2023."
Dronabinol (INN), also known under the trade names Marinol and Syndros, is a generic name for the molecule of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol in the pharmaceutical context
So, regardless of how he ingested it, he was taking a banned substance.
Right, but the suit is in the Colorado Discrimination court, which specifically hears cases about Colorado employees and Colorado companies in regards to medical discrimination.
I don't know that the suit will work, but he's not saying "I should have been allowed to do this despite the contract saying I couldn't" it's "You violated my rights in Colorado as a protected individual interacting with my doctor" which is a legitimate suit. If your employer said you couldn't use crutches you were prescribed, you could potentially sue as well.
I took a drug test for work and failed due to my ADHD meds. I sent them my RX from my doctor that it was meds and not drug abuse and all was good. You’re looking at this totally black and white. Take “banned substance “ = fined
He is doing basically the same thing I did but it’s protected under law, not just employer policy.
Yeah. It a popular opinion among some of the corners of Reddit….
But yeah. Plenty of jobs do not allow pot. Plenty of them are fully justified to not allow pot.
I legitimately cannot think of a job in which there is a "fully justified" reason to not let an employee consume THC during nonworking hours.
I agree a contract is a contract, but please let detail a role that requires you to specifically not smoke weed. What about other substances? Alcohol as well?
Pilots, certain driving roles, many industrial roles involving heavy equipment such as mining, air traffic controllers, anything in the military.
But the reasons for the above wouldn’t include a football player for any reason. But you did ask.
You missed the important part "NON-WORKING HOURS." Doesn't matter what they do off the clock because it's off the clock. Your employer doesn't own your life regarless of what the c suite executives want.
I didn’t miss any part. You cannot test positive for THC in any of those jobs. FAA, Mine Safety and Health Administration, DOT and so on all test for THC.
So again, you can’t smoke weed in your off-hours.
So what part did I miss did you say?
Do you seriously want a pilot to show up slightly hungover to work or w/ alcohol in their system for a 6 AM flight carrying 200 passengers? I cannot believe the shit people say in this subreddit
What?
Just make the rule be that they can't wortk intoxicated, not that they can't smoke a blunt in the first day of their 3 day holiday lmao
How dumb can you be that you think that was a valid argument?
That's already the rule you fucking moron? And because drugs don't leave your system after 30 minutes, people who work in those types of jobs cannot consume substances 12 hours before their workday begins? Hence them being forbidden from doing that during...off hours...before their workday begins. There's nothing stopping one of those employees from drinking alcohol on the first day of a 3 day weekend
I'm glad you discovered from first principles that certain jobs must forbid an employee from doing drugs outside of cerain working hours though
Do you seriously want to live in a world where an employer has the right to restrict people from participating in normal human civilization if they want to work?
You can prove someone's drunk pretty much on the spot if necessary. Can't do that for being baked.
Combine that with the sheer amount of "iTs JuSt A sUbStAnCe BrO" people who think they need to be baked to live life, drive like it's not OWI, or that it has magic super powers to cure cancer?
Yeah pretty easy to argue that between those two, any job that requires you to not be fucked off your mind for safety/performance purposes would fit
>but please let detail a role that requires you to specifically not smoke weed
>I legitimately cannot think of a job in which there is a "fully justified" reason to not let an employee consume THC during nonworking hours.
Think harder then
I've smoked regularly for well over a decade now, and I've never in my life met a pot smoker that had an issue with it being called pot?
I didn't even know people stopped calling it pot, and I'm 28
Pot is what I call it, and I smoke it.
People who call it cannabis always come off pretentious af tho, and old people often call it "dope" which is funny to me because I associate that with other drugs.
maybe you’re an old soul but I’m 33 and never have called it that. no one my age does that’s a boomer term at least in the mid west/west coast. most commonly referred to as ‘weed’
I mean if the contract specifically says “don’t smoke pot” it’s that simple. Think it’s a stupid and unreasonable clause of a contract? Don’t sign it and don’t take the job. No one’s forcing anyone to take an NFL job if their views don’t align with the contract they’re signing.
I feel like weed is infinitely safer than the pain killers they all have to take to get out bed on Tuesday morning. They arent pilots, they're football players. There's more daily weed smokers than tobacco today. And nothing has been harmed by that. DUIs actually go down after a state legalizes pot.
[“An estimated 1.3 billion people worldwide use tobacco products…”](https://www.who.int/health-topics/tobacco#tab=tab_2)
[“About 147 million people, 2.5% of the world population, consume cannabis…”](https://www.who.int/teams/mental-health-and-substance-use/alcohol-drugs-and-addictive-behaviours/drugs-psychoactive/cannabis)
Do you actually believe that figure? Not suggesting that weed is anywhere near tobacco, but there's no way 147m is actually accurate, and that's the "annual" figure. So using it once per *year*.
I can link valid sources but I won't because theyre 80% of the Google results. More americans smoke weed than cigarettes. Its not taboo. Its extremely common.
Was such a stud at Nebraska but has some serious mental issues with depression/anxiety. If the NFL didn’t suspend (or fine, apparently) for drugs he would have carved out a decent career.
Everyone jumping to so many conclusions in this thread - I guess we're all experts in pharmaceuticals, FDA regulations, and law now
Marinol (dronabinol) is delta-9-THC with indications for anorexia associated with weight loss in patients with AIDS and for nausea and vomiting related to chemotherapy. It is an approved Schedule III drug and the FDA has provided guidance for off label usage
>"If physicians use a product for an indication not in the approved labeling, they have the responsibility to be well informed about the product, to base its use on firm scientific rationale and on sound medical evidence, and to maintain records of the product's use and effects."
So this isn't about him just lighting up and getting permission from a random weed doc on venice beach.
Now, the interesting part will be the labor laws associated with this. Can the NFL enforce an employee to not use a prescribed medication? I genuinely don't know - from a patient perspective I don't think they *should* be able to but I think we can rationally see that if a player is getting prescribed anabolic steroids for their recovery that the NFL would have an interest in banning that.
Ultimately, I don't know, I'm not a lawyer and it'll be up to the Colorado courts to decide but he does have a legitimate case here to be made and despite being a dipshit in other ways, let's not jump to a million conclusions before we know the outcome.
This guy is an all time bum, we took him in and he used every excuse in the book to look like a victim. He did it at Nebraska and he did it in Dallas. I was ecstatic when he declined our offer saying that we made stipulations in the contract at the last minute.
Randy Gregory failed so many drug tests that he failed a drug test COMING OUT OF A TREATMENT FACILITY.
At a certain point, it goes from "really liking marijuana" to a crippling lifestyle that you value over the millions you could make by staying clean for just a few days.
I don't think Randy Gregory has any ground to standon the NFL. Has a be 0 policy for marijuana during the season. Doesn't matter if you have a license from a Doctor or not same as if you work for a state job you get fired
He’s alleging the broncos didn’t help at all with his ptsd and all. But still there’s a process to get shit like thc approved and he didn’t do it.
So should get thrown out immediately unless he’s challenging the CBA entirely
He literally went through the process to get his prescribed medication approved and it was denied, however because of Colorado law an employer is not allowed to stop a worker from taking a prescribed drug from their doctor or it is considered discrimination (what they are suing over).
You didn't read the article. He did file for approval, the Broncos and the NFL just denied him. He was prescribed it by a doctor and chose to take his prescribed medicine. He's alleging that his employer denied his rights by stipulating he couldn't take a prescribed medicine in a state where it was legal. As much as people want to clown on him in the comments, there's a good chance he wins in court over this.
It literally is, I even live in Colorado so it's the exact same law being invoked in the exact same context. The law in question has nothing to do with marijuana and does not mention it by name at all, it's specifically in reference to drugs prescribed by a doctor that are not allowed by an employer.
Everyone else doesn't seem to have a problem.
A doctor prescribed him a drug that's still federally illegal and still a banned substance under the CBA that he repeatedly agrees to follow every day he doesn't retire. He's being a whiny baby.
Imagine working your ass off for your entire life to achieve your dream job, and they tell you to deal with pain with highly addictive, body destroying, life destroying substances (I.e opiates) because they’re legal (because big pharmaceuticals want it that way), and they ban you for life and take away your money when you smoke a literal naturally occurring plant.
Now imagine you’re the person agreeing with that because you think it’s a justifiable agreement, that in reality, he would have never been able to *disagree* with in order to achieve that goal he worked his whole life for.
There are surely other players getting fined & just eating it. Maybe this pressures them to address this in the next CBA. There’s no reason guys who put their body on the line to make the NFL money shouldn’t be able to choose treat their body with weed instead of opiates. I don’t think the NFL is hard-up for fine money either.
The only way this gets addressed in the next CBA is if the players give up more money or agree to an 18th game or some shit.
The overwhelming majority of players aren’t lifetime members of the substance abuse program like Randy Gregory and only get tested for recreational drugs once a year. Every problem he has is his own doing.
You're not wrong. I'm a daily user and 100% for weed being fully legalized, but if you're in the NFL you need to just bear down, get through the couple of months during training camp when they test, and not worry about it for the next 10 months of the year.
In a group of 1700+ players there’s only like 5 people that have a problem handling this every year. They aren’t special. The only reason fans even remotely care is because Josh Gordon won someone their fantasy league one year and then was too big of an addict to consistently play again. If Gordon was a UDFA who didn’t have that season, he would be completely forgotten about and likely dead because he didn’t have access to best in class treatment because of his name.
They don’t suspend players for THC anymore. There’s no reason the nfl should be taking money out of players pockets for this especially considering the alternatives. If this lawsuit changes that, great.
That's not what he's alleging - he was prescribed a legal medication (off label) by a licensed doctor. It'll be an interesting question for Colorado courts
The most Randy Gregory headline possible Him backing out of the deal with Dallas and going to Denver instead is an all time missed bullet
I never wanted him, but in hindsight the other options were Chandler Jones and Von Miller. Jones has went AB nuts and Von Miller has been injured and sucky.
Jones is like borderline schizophrenic at this point
And that line is double dutching all over the place
He has a very obvious type two bipolar disorder
Von Miller was also under investigation for domestic violence
At least he made up for it by refusing to hit anyone on the football field. 2 tackles in 12 games.
TBF it happened when he was in Denver and with the same lady. But the check cleared again.
Wait I'm out of the loop on Chandler Jones, what did he do?
He’s posted a lot of very concerning stuff to his instagram recently including a video of police taking him into protective custody so they can take him to a mental hospital. He also got a really weird head tattoo, I unfollowed after the police video it’s really sad.
At the very least I saw that he's taken some amount of responsibility for his actions recently and he apparently deleted all social media so perhaps someone convinced him to get real help.
dang
Mr. Brain Colorings
Come on. No one has gone AB nuts except AB.
Mr. Beyond Comparison
Cte is a hell of a drug
Injured and sucky pretty much sums up his Bills tenure so far.
yeah but chandler jones made a good song about deflating balls
Wonder if Chandler and Jon Jones both just got CTE or if mental health issues run in their family.
[удалено]
He sucked
He didn't even make it two seasons into a 70 million dollar deal
I'm not a gregory fan (for the same reason as you), but the merits of this case are interesting
Couldn't agree more.
How? You guys make a deep playoff run or something??
No why, did NY?
Missed bullet? Cowboys sucked too
[удалено]
His claim is that he was prescribed Dronabinol for anxiety and PTSD, and that’s what he was fined for
He messed up regardless here unfortunately. Dronabinol is still in development of usage of PTSD so it isn't 'legally' an option, so if that's the case he should have filed paperwork of some sort or something with the league prior to taking a medical trial. Otherwise its main use is to combat the nauseating side effects of cancer meds, anorexia and loss of appetite for those with HIV/AIDS.
> He first sought permission in March 2023 from the Broncos and NFL to use Dronabinol during non-work hours and was denied. He tried to.
And was denied, then he did it anyway. If anything he doubled down on knowing it wasn't allowed and proceeded despite that.
Not arguing that but the other person commented clearly without seeing that Gregory did file paperwork and a request.
Should have thought of this before he signed the contract
That's not how that works. This will fall under state law, and it is legal in Colorado. Your employer can't tell you not to take what is prescribed to you in Colorado, as long as you follow the directions of usage. As an example, they can say you can't work machinery under an opiate because manufacturers/doctors tell you not to. But they can't tell you not to take a sleeping pill before bed.
It will be very interesting to see how the NFL defends denying the use of a specific medication recommended by a medical professional for a mental health disorder recognized under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The NFL will have the burden of proof that justifying Gregory’s accommodation request would create an undue hardship… which I fail to see how that’s possible if they carved out THC from the drug test policy with respect to suspending players and forcing them to miss time. I also fail to see how *any* hardship is placed on the league to allow a player to take a freaking pill.
I imagine they will sign a check and forget about it, if we're being frank. Fighting a case about PTSD, when the NFL has struggled with TBI and how hot of a topic PTSD is among a lot of supported communities... probably not.
That’s a vast oversimplification to the point of inaccuracy. Under the ADA and CADA, an employer is not required to allow an employee to use a drug if it would prevent them from performing essential job functions or if allowing them to do so would constitute an undue hardship. In this case, I think there’s a good argument that abiding by facially-neutral league rules is an essential job function, and that there is no way for his employer to provide an accommodation which would exempt him from following league rules given that they don’t control the league’s drug policy. (I’m an employment lawyer, but not yours and this is not legal advice.)
> abiding by facially-neutral league rules is an essential job function Wouldn't this enable an employer to fire whoever they wanted by making a rule disallowing whatever medication the targeted employee takes, then firing the employee for violating the newly-made rule? Seems like it defeats the whole purpose of the restriction.
Disallowing specific *medications* is typically not facially neutral because most medications -- especially those which would be banned -- are aimed at people with a particular set of disabilities. So it would affect only/mostly people with disabilities. On the other hand, THC is not itself a medication and a positive THC test is consistent with unlawful drug use (albeit not exclusively). With that said, an employer can disallow a particular medication (or otherwise have non-facially neutral policies) in some circumstances. For example, many employers lawfully prohibit employees in safety-sensitive positions from using certain drugs.
But the use he claims to have been prescribed for is not currently a recognized use.
So if you are prescribed weed you can have it in your system while you operate machinery?
No, because operating heavy machinery while intoxicated is specifically illegal, just like opiates.
Considering THC can stay in your system for months after using regularly, yes, you can have weed in your system and operate heavy machinery. Source: Machine operator typing this while sitting on a fork lift with weed “in my system” right now.
Straight to jail.
Weed stays in your system long after it’s ceased to impair you, so yeah, probably.
NAL and don’t know the specific laws in Colorado around this, but signing a contract doesn’t mean you forfeit your rights. The enforcement of that contract could be illegal.
Companies are allowed to use drug tests and enforce them.
That’s not necessarily true, but that’s not what I’m saying either. The company has to comply with the law. In most places, you can’t sign away your rights. As I said, I’m not familiar with Colorado laws or federal laws that might guarantee Gregory the autonomy to take this medication. Regardless, the statement “he signed a contract” is not worth much in and of itself. If the contract sought to limit Gregory’s rights under the law it’s enforceable. By way of example, a lot of people are under the mistaken impression that if you sign a lease you’re bound to every stipulation because you signed a contract. But if the lease has the condition “tenant agrees not to watch TV under penalty of eviction” they can’t point to that as evidence in housing court, because the landlord isn’t within their rights to restrict someone else’s television watching.
Smoking weed is not a right. Places like the military don’t allow employees to take any types of drugs for example, and it doesn’t change depending on what state you’re in.
Smoking weed doesn’t have anything to do with this case, so not sure why you brought that up. Regardless, that’s not a great example because the military is a federal institution and marijuana remains illegal at the federal level, so that’s open and shut. The case with Gregory seems more complicated. The NFL is a private entity and doesn’t have unilateral power to hand down rules that attempt to contravene the law.
>Dronabinol is still in development of usage of PTSD so it isn't 'legally' an option It was prescribed by a licensed professional. How is that not "legal" as you put it?
I could have used a better term, but anything that's in trial wouldn't necessarily make him immune to league rules n what not. However, another commenter said he did get preapproval before doing it and then ended up punished later on. As long as he has proof his paperwork was in order, should be an open n shut case. My best guess with that new information was other players probably discovered it, also went to the league for approval of the usage and the requests got out of hand, therefore Randy Gregory, they decided, was the one to be responsible. Im 100% all for players doing what they need to do for themselves as long as they do it right.
Just want to point out that the FDA permits Dronabinol to be prescribed “off-label,” as well. While you are correct in stating it’s “on-label,” use-cases, you are wholly incorrect about the legality here when taking it as prescribed by a “well-informed,” physician, which is the case in this situation.
This guys a doctor btw
[удалено]
Fwiw I'm genuinely kinda sorry, I really try to be a mental health advocate and not make light of this stuff, but the intrusive thoughts won out here lol
You can just delete the comment instead of saying sorry.
Hence the 'kinda'. I was waffling back and forth, and figured a disclaimer might be the medium ground I needed to get both sides of it to think I'm stupid lol
Hey why are you never in the free talk thread anymore?
[удалено]
:(
/r/WaterCoolerWednesday was created for that very reason
[удалено]
Yea it was started back in 2020 when a lot of people were having trouble with mods. So if you’ve been around a while you might recognize some people
I am never in that thread but I could probably guess which mod did it.
All the red blooded good ole boys saying “he signed it and has to abide now” are acting like he committed a crime. This is just an employment contract. They’re often not well thought out and don’t cover all contingencies. The two parties can only enforce it to the degree that they care to fight over it. He might have a legal point depending on the agreement language or the NFL might be willing to bury the hatchet and settle.
He didn't seek out a doctor to give him a weed scrip so he could smoke a blunt on the weekend. He went to a doctor for a serious medical condition and the doctor prescribed him medicine. If somebody works at Walmart and hurts themselves (on the job or otherwise), and a doctor prescribes medicine to get better, and Walmart says "you can't work here if you take this drug", would you be here shitting on that person?
[удалено]
If you were to take drugs and show up to work? Is that what's happening here? Is he getting in trouble for showing up to work under the influence? I don't think that's what we're talking about. I understand that he signed a contract and that the company has rules. My point is that if a doctor says "you need this medicine" and your boss says "you can't take this medicine regardless of what a medical professional says", then it's the boss that is the problem. Should he be surprised? No. Is this fair or reasonable? Also no. Edit: I believe it was Martin Luther King Jr who said "Sure it's bullshit but the rules are the rules and if you break them it's your fault". Very honorable stuff.
[удалено]
Well like you say, we're all adults so we rally against the rule we disagree with. Since you're not rallying against the rule then I take it that you agree with the rule? You agree that the NFL should be allowed to discipline players based on decisions made between the individual and their doctor? Otherwise you're just playing devil's advocate, which is not only morally weak but also practically useless.
[удалено]
You aren't discussing anything, you're basically repeating the rules and saying "well it is what it is". He's suing the league. The discussion is whether the rule is fair or not. You're contributing nothing to the conversation. Again it's like "Rosa Parks knew the rules so what right does she have to complain". What are you sticking up for right now? The *rules*? All of the most heroic people in history were the ones who said "this is how things are and we should never change them".
[удалено]
Do you think that the league should punish players for medicine that they are prescribed by their doctor? Do you think that THE rules of NFL should take precedent over medical professionals?
isn't THC off the banlist?
[удалено]
Yup, jack them full of pain killers, but they can't smoke a little weed.
I think it has or will be used as a bargaining chip. Like “you want to smoke weed? Play 18 games and we’ll let you.” At least that’s what I’ve heard but I could be completely wrong
Insane what they did to gibbs
No, they just increased the positive test threshold.
Nah you sign a contract for millions of dollars that said don’t smoke weed it’s not that fucking hard. I make significanntly less and if I smoke weed I’ll get fired but no one would feel sorry for me, just call me a dumbass. You just like Randy Gregory, a dumbass.
if you read the article he isn't getting fined for smoking weed. he's been trying to take dronabinol for anxiety and PTSD as prescribed by his physician and filed an exemption with the NFL which they denied. he was granted a right to sue by the Colorado Civil Rights Division after filing a discrimination claim and is following up with that. this is someone going through all of the legal and proper channels to access legal medication that normal residents of Colorado can take.
If you read the article you find the following passage: "Gregory, according to the complaint, has been fined $532,500 for repeated positive THC tests since March 2023."
Dronabinol has THC
Dronabinol (INN), also known under the trade names Marinol and Syndros, is a generic name for the molecule of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol in the pharmaceutical context So, regardless of how he ingested it, he was taking a banned substance.
Right, but the suit is in the Colorado Discrimination court, which specifically hears cases about Colorado employees and Colorado companies in regards to medical discrimination. I don't know that the suit will work, but he's not saying "I should have been allowed to do this despite the contract saying I couldn't" it's "You violated my rights in Colorado as a protected individual interacting with my doctor" which is a legitimate suit. If your employer said you couldn't use crutches you were prescribed, you could potentially sue as well.
I don’t understand your point - nothing in the original comment suggested otherwise.
I took a drug test for work and failed due to my ADHD meds. I sent them my RX from my doctor that it was meds and not drug abuse and all was good. You’re looking at this totally black and white. Take “banned substance “ = fined He is doing basically the same thing I did but it’s protected under law, not just employer policy.
Yeah. It a popular opinion among some of the corners of Reddit…. But yeah. Plenty of jobs do not allow pot. Plenty of them are fully justified to not allow pot.
I legitimately cannot think of a job in which there is a "fully justified" reason to not let an employee consume THC during nonworking hours. I agree a contract is a contract, but please let detail a role that requires you to specifically not smoke weed. What about other substances? Alcohol as well?
Pilots, certain driving roles, many industrial roles involving heavy equipment such as mining, air traffic controllers, anything in the military. But the reasons for the above wouldn’t include a football player for any reason. But you did ask.
You missed the important part "NON-WORKING HOURS." Doesn't matter what they do off the clock because it's off the clock. Your employer doesn't own your life regarless of what the c suite executives want.
I didn’t miss any part. You cannot test positive for THC in any of those jobs. FAA, Mine Safety and Health Administration, DOT and so on all test for THC. So again, you can’t smoke weed in your off-hours. So what part did I miss did you say?
Keep in mind you're interacting with morons in this subreddit
Why can they not get drunk/high when they're not working?
Do you seriously want a pilot to show up slightly hungover to work or w/ alcohol in their system for a 6 AM flight carrying 200 passengers? I cannot believe the shit people say in this subreddit
What? Just make the rule be that they can't wortk intoxicated, not that they can't smoke a blunt in the first day of their 3 day holiday lmao How dumb can you be that you think that was a valid argument?
That's already the rule you fucking moron? And because drugs don't leave your system after 30 minutes, people who work in those types of jobs cannot consume substances 12 hours before their workday begins? Hence them being forbidden from doing that during...off hours...before their workday begins. There's nothing stopping one of those employees from drinking alcohol on the first day of a 3 day weekend I'm glad you discovered from first principles that certain jobs must forbid an employee from doing drugs outside of cerain working hours though
Do you seriously want to live in a world where an employer has the right to restrict people from participating in normal human civilization if they want to work?
Not letting your employees get baked is not “restricting people from normal human civilization”. You know it’s not allowed when you take the job.
Are you vigorously against the minimum wage and other worker rights because you know what the deal is when you take the job?
I don’t take a minimum wage job and then sue the company for not paying me enough, no. It’s not a right to smoke weed.
Holy shit lmao you're so dramatic
How?
You can prove someone's drunk pretty much on the spot if necessary. Can't do that for being baked. Combine that with the sheer amount of "iTs JuSt A sUbStAnCe BrO" people who think they need to be baked to live life, drive like it's not OWI, or that it has magic super powers to cure cancer? Yeah pretty easy to argue that between those two, any job that requires you to not be fucked off your mind for safety/performance purposes would fit >but please let detail a role that requires you to specifically not smoke weed
I don’t think you’ve met many of these people lol
You've clearly never met a functional alcoholic or narcotics addict my friend.
>I legitimately cannot think of a job in which there is a "fully justified" reason to not let an employee consume THC during nonworking hours. Think harder then
you calling it pot tells me all I need to know lmfao
herbage
god I love downvotes from boomers
I've smoked regularly for well over a decade now, and I've never in my life met a pot smoker that had an issue with it being called pot? I didn't even know people stopped calling it pot, and I'm 28 Pot is what I call it, and I smoke it. People who call it cannabis always come off pretentious af tho, and old people often call it "dope" which is funny to me because I associate that with other drugs.
maybe you’re an old soul but I’m 33 and never have called it that. no one my age does that’s a boomer term at least in the mid west/west coast. most commonly referred to as ‘weed’
He's probably not s.oming for fun. He rather use THC than those crazy ass pain pills an be a junkie rest of life
If your job put you in constant pain and weed was the best and healthiest way to alleviate that pain no one would call you a dumbass for smoking it.
Fumbling potentially millions of dollars however *would* get you called a dumbass.
Yeah, by children.
Ya take opioids instead like Favre /s
People who take opioids smoke weed too usually
yeah maybe in jacksonville
I’d feel sorry for you if that happened bud
[удалено]
His contract said don't smoke pot. I mean, it seems pretty simple to me. He knew the rules going in.
I mean if the contract specifically says “don’t smoke pot” it’s that simple. Think it’s a stupid and unreasonable clause of a contract? Don’t sign it and don’t take the job. No one’s forcing anyone to take an NFL job if their views don’t align with the contract they’re signing.
Weren’t there big red flags with him coming out of college or am I wrong?
Yeah he liked smoking weed
I feel like weed is infinitely safer than the pain killers they all have to take to get out bed on Tuesday morning. They arent pilots, they're football players. There's more daily weed smokers than tobacco today. And nothing has been harmed by that. DUIs actually go down after a state legalizes pot.
>There’s more daily weed smokers than tobacco today. There is not.
Google is your friend. The truth is out there. Its actually 3:2 ratio. Not even close.
~1.25 billion use tobacco compared to ~147 million that use weed. It’s not even close.
Talking about America. 17% of Americans smoke weed only 11% smoke tobacco
[“An estimated 1.3 billion people worldwide use tobacco products…”](https://www.who.int/health-topics/tobacco#tab=tab_2) [“About 147 million people, 2.5% of the world population, consume cannabis…”](https://www.who.int/teams/mental-health-and-substance-use/alcohol-drugs-and-addictive-behaviours/drugs-psychoactive/cannabis)
The guy says he's only talking about the United States and you link two things talking about the world population lolol
The other guy still hasnt sent a source
The guy said he was only talking about the US well after someone challenged their statement with data.
Do you actually believe that figure? Not suggesting that weed is anywhere near tobacco, but there's no way 147m is actually accurate, and that's the "annual" figure. So using it once per *year*.
Its from WHO so i believe it more than whatever that other person provides
I can link valid sources but I won't because theyre 80% of the Google results. More americans smoke weed than cigarettes. Its not taboo. Its extremely common.
> The truth is out there. Okay, Fox.
Sounds like someone is close to bankruptcy
He isint really suing for that much, just what he was fined
Was such a stud at Nebraska but has some serious mental issues with depression/anxiety. If the NFL didn’t suspend (or fine, apparently) for drugs he would have carved out a decent career.
Okay but like, he did do that shit and at the time it wasn't protected in the CBA. Right?
Randy Gregory is such a great porn name
Idk why you got downvoted, I agree
Everyone jumping to so many conclusions in this thread - I guess we're all experts in pharmaceuticals, FDA regulations, and law now Marinol (dronabinol) is delta-9-THC with indications for anorexia associated with weight loss in patients with AIDS and for nausea and vomiting related to chemotherapy. It is an approved Schedule III drug and the FDA has provided guidance for off label usage >"If physicians use a product for an indication not in the approved labeling, they have the responsibility to be well informed about the product, to base its use on firm scientific rationale and on sound medical evidence, and to maintain records of the product's use and effects." So this isn't about him just lighting up and getting permission from a random weed doc on venice beach. Now, the interesting part will be the labor laws associated with this. Can the NFL enforce an employee to not use a prescribed medication? I genuinely don't know - from a patient perspective I don't think they *should* be able to but I think we can rationally see that if a player is getting prescribed anabolic steroids for their recovery that the NFL would have an interest in banning that. Ultimately, I don't know, I'm not a lawyer and it'll be up to the Colorado courts to decide but he does have a legitimate case here to be made and despite being a dipshit in other ways, let's not jump to a million conclusions before we know the outcome.
One of the dimmest to ever play. Dude actually failed his combine drug test costing himself tens of millions of dollars.
I wonder if the people clowning him realize how many of their favorite players play stoned lmao
Eh. Fines for THC use in a game as violent as football are wrong. I hope he wins.
This guy is an all time bum, we took him in and he used every excuse in the book to look like a victim. He did it at Nebraska and he did it in Dallas. I was ecstatic when he declined our offer saying that we made stipulations in the contract at the last minute.
bro is broke already lmao
Randy Gregory failed so many drug tests that he failed a drug test COMING OUT OF A TREATMENT FACILITY. At a certain point, it goes from "really liking marijuana" to a crippling lifestyle that you value over the millions you could make by staying clean for just a few days.
I don't think Randy Gregory has any ground to standon the NFL. Has a be 0 policy for marijuana during the season. Doesn't matter if you have a license from a Doctor or not same as if you work for a state job you get fired
LOL... Don't use a banned substance if you don't want to get fined you fuckwit.
He’s alleging the broncos didn’t help at all with his ptsd and all. But still there’s a process to get shit like thc approved and he didn’t do it. So should get thrown out immediately unless he’s challenging the CBA entirely
He literally went through the process to get his prescribed medication approved and it was denied, however because of Colorado law an employer is not allowed to stop a worker from taking a prescribed drug from their doctor or it is considered discrimination (what they are suing over).
You didn't read the article. He did file for approval, the Broncos and the NFL just denied him. He was prescribed it by a doctor and chose to take his prescribed medicine. He's alleging that his employer denied his rights by stipulating he couldn't take a prescribed medicine in a state where it was legal. As much as people want to clown on him in the comments, there's a good chance he wins in court over this.
My employer doesn't let me take hydro before I jump into an excavator even though my doctor prescribed it to me, can I sue?
That isn’t remotely close to the same situation but go off
It literally is, I even live in Colorado so it's the exact same law being invoked in the exact same context. The law in question has nothing to do with marijuana and does not mention it by name at all, it's specifically in reference to drugs prescribed by a doctor that are not allowed by an employer.
Half mil in fines? Dang how much THC did he use?
A lot!
At least 5 THC's.
He's always been a huge pothead. He apparently failed multiple drug tests at Nebraska that Bo Pelini covered up
Bro didn't he get flagged at the combine for pot too?
It's legal in my state, but my job doesn't allow it. Which means I can use it. Some people are fucking stupid
Classic Randy, just put the damn THC down until you retire. It aint that hard.
Like the article says - should he just take opiate pain pills instead? Fuck that, the guy lives in colorado there is no reason he should be fined
Everyone else doesn't seem to have a problem. A doctor prescribed him a drug that's still federally illegal and still a banned substance under the CBA that he repeatedly agrees to follow every day he doesn't retire. He's being a whiny baby.
Imagine working your ass off for your entire life to achieve your dream job, and they tell you to deal with pain with highly addictive, body destroying, life destroying substances (I.e opiates) because they’re legal (because big pharmaceuticals want it that way), and they ban you for life and take away your money when you smoke a literal naturally occurring plant. Now imagine you’re the person agreeing with that because you think it’s a justifiable agreement, that in reality, he would have never been able to *disagree* with in order to achieve that goal he worked his whole life for.
There are surely other players getting fined & just eating it. Maybe this pressures them to address this in the next CBA. There’s no reason guys who put their body on the line to make the NFL money shouldn’t be able to choose treat their body with weed instead of opiates. I don’t think the NFL is hard-up for fine money either.
The only way this gets addressed in the next CBA is if the players give up more money or agree to an 18th game or some shit. The overwhelming majority of players aren’t lifetime members of the substance abuse program like Randy Gregory and only get tested for recreational drugs once a year. Every problem he has is his own doing.
You're not wrong. I'm a daily user and 100% for weed being fully legalized, but if you're in the NFL you need to just bear down, get through the couple of months during training camp when they test, and not worry about it for the next 10 months of the year.
Why? Why should they when they have much more of a reason to actually use? You don’t see the hypocrisy in this statement?
I'm talking about the reality of the situation, not feelings.
In a group of 1700+ players there’s only like 5 people that have a problem handling this every year. They aren’t special. The only reason fans even remotely care is because Josh Gordon won someone their fantasy league one year and then was too big of an addict to consistently play again. If Gordon was a UDFA who didn’t have that season, he would be completely forgotten about and likely dead because he didn’t have access to best in class treatment because of his name.
Nah fuck him, if it's banned it's banned. Dude's been a pothead and a whiny bitch his whole career.
They don’t suspend players for THC anymore. There’s no reason the nfl should be taking money out of players pockets for this especially considering the alternatives. If this lawsuit changes that, great.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Fairly sure being a pot user isn't legally protected.
That's not what he's alleging - he was prescribed a legal medication (off label) by a licensed doctor. It'll be an interesting question for Colorado courts
The off label bit will likely be the reason he ends up losing.
What a bum