Jump to content

Ricky Williams on 60 minutes


Mac6674

Recommended Posts

First, I think Ricky was messing with Mike Wallace when he replied to the question of him doing more dangerous drugs than marijuana when he replied, "Sweets. Sugar." He made some valid points, though, especially when he asked when his retirement would be OK. After he was permanently injured? My only issue with Ricky's retirement was timing. Other than that, he's right. First of all, had he been injured, the Dolphins would drop him without a second thought. Secondly, and I may be wrong, but aren't they trying to get back signing bonus money that the Saints paid him? Plus, they're trying to get back money from incentives; if he met the incentives, how do they have any claim to that money? Finally, how hypocritical is it to test NFL players for pot? It's not a performance enhancer, and I don't think there are that many 300 lb. men with speed who get that way through purely natural means. Not to mention, Ricky can't smoke a joint to relax after taking a beating on a Sunday afternoon, but they can inject him with cortisone to relieve pain and further injure himself to keep him playing. The bottom line is the NFL treats these guys like cattle, and it's a proven fact that playing in the NFL actually shortens your lifespan.

Having said that, I'd love to see him come back with Oakland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I may be wrong, but aren't they trying to get back signing bonus money that the Saints paid him? Plus, they're trying to get back money from incentives; if he met the incentives, how do they have any claim to that money?

It was in his contract that if he did not forfill his contract, and retired in the middle of it he would have to repay the team he has the contract with.

Finally, how hypocritical is it to test NFL players for pot? It's not a performance enhancer, and I don't think there are that many 300 lb. men with speed who get that way through purely natural means.

I don't see the hypocracy. The NFL test for steriods, and them giving a test for pot is no different than the company you work for giving you a drug test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't agree with pre-employment drug testing, either. Just for the record, I haven't smoked pot in years, but I still think the laws for it are arbitrary and end up wasting taxpayer's money. That's a seperate issue, though. The NFL, though, is completely hypocritical. They supposedly test for steroids, but come on, do you honestly believe the handful of guys they catch every year are the only guys using them? What's the reasoning behind testing these athletes for pot? It's not because the NFL is so concerned with law and order; there are plenty of guys in the league who've been convicted of assault or spousal abuse. Heck, Leonard Little killed a woman while driving under the influence, but he's allowed to play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I interned w/ the NFLPA during lawskool. I learned there that the average career for an NFL player lasts four (4) years. Can you imagine training your entire life to prepare yourself for a career that short? That fact and the gobs of money they bring in for the owners are the reasons for the big salaries -- you gotta make in four years enough to set you up for life.

Of course, most of these guys can still work in some capacity after their football careers end. But I'd be pissed if I went through lawskool and incurred all that debt and then I was forced to change careers after four years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that's exactly why I don't feel bad for the Dolphins as an organization. In fact, I think a running back averages just over 3 years, and most of these guys don't make the huge money. A nice chunk for a short period, but still. Look at a guy like Earl Campbell now; he's a complete mess at 50 from playing the game. Have you ever seen Chuck Bednarik's hands? These guys literally trade years from their lives to play a sport for big bucks, and the teams and the league kick them aside as soon as they're not useful. I read a book a few years ago by a former Raiders doctor about what they do to get these guys back on the field ASAP. It's scary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not hypocritical. You can argue they should test for steriods, and I might agree, but marijuana is illegal, no ifs ands or buts. They have every right to test for that and punish him.

I wonder if technically they do have the right to test him. has this ever be challenged in the supreme court? (Probably has I guess!) But what right does a professional sportsman have to decline to take a drug test on the grounds that it might incriminate him? given the amount of protestations of innocence when sportsmen are found guilty of taking drugs, it is a quite gray area IMO.

Wembley-1.png

2011/12 WFL Champions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not hypocritical. You can argue they should test for steriods, and I might agree, but marijuana is illegal, no ifs ands or buts. They have every right to test for that and punish him.

I wonder if technically they do have the right to test him. has this ever be challenged in the supreme court? (Probably has I guess!) But what right does a professional sportsman have to decline to take a drug test on the grounds that it might incriminate him? given the amount of protestations of innocence when sportsmen are found guilty of taking drugs, it is a quite gray area IMO.

The other side to that is that they don't have to play in the league if they don't like the rules, AND, it will only incriminate them if they deserve it by failing the test...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not hypocritical. You can argue they should test for steriods, and I might agree, but marijuana is illegal, no ifs ands or buts. They have every right to test for that and punish him.

I wonder if technically they do have the right to test him. has this ever be challenged in the supreme court? (Probably has I guess!) But what right does a professional sportsman have to decline to take a drug test on the grounds that it might incriminate him? given the amount of protestations of innocence when sportsmen are found guilty of taking drugs, it is a quite gray area IMO.

The other side to that is that they don't have to play in the league if they don't like the rules, AND, it will only incriminate them if they deserve it by failing the test...

True, and I am not at all saying that a pro sportsman should do this at all, but think of all the sports people who have failed tests because of nandrolone or other questionable reasons, (nandrolone is naturally prduce by the body and some scientists say that for instance eating red meat will give you an abnormally high level of nandrolone). It would be possible I would have thought for a sportsman to say that he didn't have confidence in the testing procedure and refuse to take the test as he didn't know what it would throw up.

Wembley-1.png

2011/12 WFL Champions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I interned w/ the NFLPA during lawskool. I learned there that the average career for an NFL player lasts four (4) years. Can you imagine training your entire life to prepare yourself for a career that short? That fact and the gobs of money they bring in for the owners are the reasons for the big salaries -- you gotta make in four years enough to set you up for life.

Of course, most of these guys can still work in some capacity after their football careers end. But I'd be pissed if I went through lawskool and incurred all that debt and then I was forced to change careers after four years.

Yeah, but see, you gotta pay to go to law school.

These guys don't pay a cent in a college for their education which, if they play their cards right, could set them up for a lucrative career after football. Then, they go to the league for 4 years, make about as much a Latvia did this year, and then head home to endorsement city. Oh, and the option (after you've found out you can't quite cut it in the L) to go to the AFL, CFL, NFL Europe, etc, and earn a decent living that way.

Those violins you hear? They're playing for the guy who paid his own way through college and then got stuck in a dead-end $30,000/year job. Or perhaps the guy who couldn't make it into college.

I have very little pity for the players. Yes, the owners may make tons of money off of them, but who really came to see the guy who will only last 4 years? I'll tell you one thing, when people buy Colts tickets, they're not paying to see Waine Bacon.

WINnipegSigBanner.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll tell you one thing, when people buy Colts tickets, they're not paying to see Waine Bacon.

Well, if I move to Indianapolis within the next 7 months and buy Colts tickets, it will be because I WANT TO SEE WAINE BACON :D

I saw, I came, I left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ricky Williams is a big dumbass.

If a player feels the need to end his career early due to potential injury, that's his prerogative. Robert Smith did that a few years ago. The average NFL career only lasts a few years, and it would be devestating to have any career cut short due to an injury.

After watching that interview, you can't say that's the only reason Williams retired. He was ashamed of the fact he got caught with pot in his system. Not ashamed that he smoked it, just that he was caught and the findings made public.

I think ESPN was talking about the Smith situation the other day. It's not a snap decision to step away from the league if the player's scared of injury. In most, if not all cases, this decision is a long time coming. The player may be thinking about thuis for months, even for a few seasons.

Williams is not much different from the aimless college graduate with a liberal arts degree who is going to hang around the house until some cool job opportunity presents itself. The big difference is he already had the job, and bailed out big time on his teammates and fans. He doesn't even understand why he should apologize to everyone.

There's no way this was a snap judgment. He had to have been thinking about this for a while, and he owed it to his teammates and management to let them know retirement was a possibility. Williams is just a big doughnut who is too stupid to show responsibility. He even laughed at the fact he has three children with three different mothers.

The more I watched that interview, the more frustrated I got at the fact Williams is a dumb selfish waste of space, and too blissfully ignorant to realize it. The league is better off with out him (as much as the Dolphins might argue otherwise).

Back-to-Back Fatal Forty Champion 2015 & 2016

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Williams is a pot addict who has become a lazy good for nothing bum who will regret what he did when he is 40. He will end up in jail and will end up penniless, and it will be all his fault.

ecyclopedia.gif

www.sportsecyclopedia.com

For the best in sports history go to the Sports E-Cyclopedia at

http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com

champssigtank.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tell you something I find interesting... how Americans treat sports people who aren't perfect or reveal the inner world of sport. This has been brought to me in a number of ways recently. The reaction to Ricky Williams frailties is one- Why does the guy have to receive such a damming just because he is someway short of being perfect? Sport is full of imperfect people, I am fairly sure that Williams isn't the only doofus around in pro sports. Does he owe anything to Dolphins fans? Not in my book, not anymore than someone who insists on being traded during a season or holds out for another pot full of money.

Or take Jim Bouton. The guy writes an amusing account of life as a pro baseball playyer and gets shunned fopr it. The Commisioner of Baseball tries to force him to say it was all lies. Aren't we taking things a little too seriously guys??

Or Pete Rose. The guy made mistakes, aned has to pay a huge sacrifice. Whilst Baseball players who do things that are far worse according to rest of society (drug taking (and I am talking players like Dwight Gooden)) get a little slap on the wrist.

The point is that these are sportsmen, nothing more or less, they have the same frailties the same weaknesses as us all. Often times its made worse because of what there talent gives them as they are growing up. A maths genius, or a music genius isn't given the same free passes that a star football player is in the American system. That can't be good for there own personal development.

Wembley-1.png

2011/12 WFL Champions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can argue they should test for steriods, and I might agree, but marijuana is illegal, no ifs ands or buts.

Steroids are illegal as well.

Congress scheduled steroids as Schedule III controlled substances under Title 21 of the United States Code, which regulates Food and Drugs. The legislation was called the "Anabolic Steroids Control Act of 1990". It places steroids in the same legal class as amphetamines, methamphetamines, opium, and morphine.

I don't agree with pre-employment drug testing, either.  Just for the record, I haven't smoked pot in years, but I still think the laws for it are arbitrary and end up wasting taxpayer's money.

I don't know what kind of work you do, but I certainly like knowing that the people working around me are drug-free.

The reaction to Ricky Williams frailties is one- Why does the guy have to receive such a damming just because he is someway short of being perfect?

I agree. I couldn't help but watch his interview and feel sorry for him, because he looks lost. Something tells me his story won't end happily.

0I3kSAc.png

We are wolves • Under the moon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Survival, would you rather have a guy working with you that smoked a joint last night and feels fine this morning, or had some nice legal alcohol and is hungover?

Of course the type of work makes a difference. Test my airline pilot, please; do I care if the guy behind the counter at McDonald's is stoned?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know what? Pot should be legalized, period. God knows I'm no big fan of it, I hate the smell of it, and I'm not thrilled with the way it turns active folks lethargic. But it's a lot safer than alcohol, it's not addictive in the manner that nicotine is. It's a relaxant, a depressant. No one has ever robbed a bank because their pot addiction got out of hand (mainly because they were staring at their shoes on their way to the job, got lost, and started giggling at the street signs).

I realize that it's illegal in the US, and has been since the rich orchard owners in California realized that their migrant workers were having way too much fun in their off hours, scaring the plop out of them, and had the government criminalize it. If anyone is still watching "Reefer Madness" or any of the other government-sponsored propaganda films and using them as their basis for the evils of good ol' North-slope Apollo Tripweed, it's time to reconsider things.

So many harmful things that can kill us are legal: alcohol, nicotine, fast food, any TV- or magazine-advertised designer drug (Have any of us really read the side effects to some of these drugs?), so in the big picture, pot ain't all that bad. Like I say, it ain't my cup of tea, but for a lot of people, it fits the bill. 20,000 people at a Bon Jovi can't all be wrong (well they can be wrong for liking Bon Jovi, but that's another story).

And I already know that some people are gearing up for the "But it's illegal, so people should be charged and castrated for using it" argument, which is fine. All I'll say to that is, governments aren't always right. Governments do not act in the best interests of the people they represent, they act in the best interests of re-election. Governments do good things, they do bad things, and they do stupid things. I've never taken anything my governments do at face value. If Canada decriminalizes pot, good for them. It becomes a finable offense for possession, like a parking ticket, and people move on with their lives (don't panic, Tank, trafficking and grow-ops will be punishable by law).

Ricky Williams, yes, is an idiot. To quit football over wanting to blast a doobie is silly. But to be honest, he's set for life. Who's to say deep down that he really needs any more cash in the coffers? It's not like pot will make him go broke, it's cheap. But if it gives him time with his kids and more enjoyment during the TBS Three Stooges Marathon, then more power to him.

My .02, worth exactly what you paid for it.

Welcome to DrunjFlix

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Survival, would you rather have a guy working with you that smoked a joint last night and feels fine this morning, or had some nice legal alcohol and is hungover? 

Of course the type of work makes a difference.  Test my airline pilot, please; do I care if the guy behind the counter at McDonald's is stoned?

Well, in my line of work either situation would lead to immediate dismissal. The marijuana use would be discovered through testing and the hangover would be noticed while working. So, it really isn't a decision that I would have to make.

But, hey, while we are dealing with hypotheticals lets try this one: would you rather work with a guy who snorted some cocaine last night or took some hits from a meth pipe? Oh, right, stupid question because as we all know the only illegal drug that "normal, working people" use is marijuana.

:rolleyes:

0I3kSAc.png

We are wolves • Under the moon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a pretty vigilant workplace you have there, because I'm sure there are no cops or doctors or any other professionals who keep their jobs despite major alcohol problems, which would include working through hangovers. I'm not going to get into cocaine or meth because I don't know how long the effects last, but I do know that there's no pot hangover, while a hard night of drinking can easily mess up your capabilities for the entire next day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a pretty vigilant workplace you have there, because I'm sure there are no cops or doctors or any other professionals who keep their jobs despite major alcohol problems, which would include working through hangovers.

You are right, I'm sure there aren't any either.

All I'm trying to say is that there are certain jobs/careers where drug testing is absolutely necessary. If you don't want to be tested or don't like being tested don't work in these professions. I know some people feel marijuana should be legalized for certain reasons, and others feel it shouldn't be for other reasons. The only thing that really matters at this point is that it isn't legal in the United States. If someone doesn't like playing by these rules they can take their ball (or bowl in this case) and go home, just like Ricky Williams.

I'm not going to get into cocaine or meth because I don't know how long the effects last, but I do know that there's no pot hangover, while a hard night of drinking can easily mess up your capabilities for the entire next day.
I don't agree with pre-employment drug testing, either.  Just for the record, I haven't smoked pot in years, but I still think the laws for it are arbitrary and end up wasting taxpayer's money.

So are you against all forms of pre-employment drug testing or just those that screen for marijuana?

0I3kSAc.png

We are wolves • Under the moon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.