Bill Swerski Posted August 22, 2007 Share Posted August 22, 2007 Alcoholism is a disease. Lung cancer is a disease as well. Funny how people who don't smoke two packs a day seem to avoid it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted August 22, 2007 Share Posted August 22, 2007 I was pretty certain it was because he didn't meet the terms of his parole & was subsequently arrested yet again. I would be willing to bet Goodell gave both the organization and Thurman his reasons and IMO it should be left up to Thurman and/or the Bengals if they want to make that information public knowledge. it has consistently been said on all the local and national stations that we don't know all the facts here. it is assumed that something else went down with thurman that is not public which caused goodell to enact the suspension. goodell seems like a stand-up guy and to have the best interests of the league at heart, so i'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. this judge weighing in just makes no sense and is out of line, imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShiznit Posted August 22, 2007 Share Posted August 22, 2007 Are you freaking kidding me? Alcohol may be legal indeed but driving with certain levels in your system are not legal. This judge's credibility comes into question now. What happens when he gets a convicted drunk driver in his court who states he was driving home from an NFL game? Does he let him go? Another moronic, liberal judge set to completely turn our society upside down... Just out of curiosity....where in the article did it say he was a liberal judge. And if you are pulled over for drunking driving, should your company be able to suspend you for a year without pay??? Just a question...two to be exact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted August 22, 2007 Share Posted August 22, 2007 And if you are pulled over for drunking driving, should your company be able to suspend you for a year without pay??? I know you didn't ask me, but I'd like to address this. If I take a position with a company that has a very high public profile, and then I accept an outrageous amount of pay to do my job - but I have to as a condition of employment with this company sign a contract with the company as a trade off for working for the high profile company for an obscene amount of money that states that I have to act within the bounds of a morals clause and not smudge the company's image or else I will be suspended without pay at the discretion of the CEO - then yes, I would expect to be suspended without pay as a result of my illegal actions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazysight Posted August 22, 2007 Share Posted August 22, 2007 Judgey is right, NFL officials are hypocrites, but that's always been the case. They promote the consumption of beer and glamorize it through their silly brainless titty commercials every game, and sell/market it at their events, but then turn around and are all like "Oh, well we only promote the responsible use of alcohol. (like there's any kind of control within the stadiums after it's sold)...as they're pocketing the profits from their little scheme" It's nothing new though, I was saying the same thing about NFL officials a few years ago when they were promoting their product using an obvious 18ish year-old reprobate named Britney Spears. They didn't care so long as she was the hot-ticket at the time and people were willing to pay the money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShiznit Posted August 22, 2007 Share Posted August 22, 2007 I know you didn't ask me, but I'd like to address this. If I take a position with a company that has a very high public profile, and then I accept an outrageous amount of pay to do my job - but I have to as a condition of employment with this company sign a contract with the company as a trade off for working for the high profile company for an obscene amount of money that states that I have to act within the bounds of a morals clause and not smudge the company's image or else I will be suspended without pay at the discretion of the CEO - then yes, I would expect to be suspended without pay as a result of my illegal actions. Listen....I don't disagree with a conduct policy....but no...you wouldn't accept that...you would sue if it happened. The question is simple....just because there is an obscene amount of money seems to me to be very irrelevent....however...I do understand why it would be looked at the way it is. But I find it REDICULOUS that he is suspended for a year. It would seem to me that the Bengals should make that call since they are his direct employerer....and that the league should then fine the franchise. I don't agree with Goodells strong arm tactics at all. Anyway...to address your point head on, I work for a high profile company with a morals clause and one about illegal activity.....probably more well liked than the NFL....and they don't even go this far....because Drinking and Driving....while it is bad and shouldn't be done...isn't really a violation of a morals clause. IE...it does not involve jail time in most cases. Now if it interfered with ones driving and made it impossible to do your job at the firm...then yes...termination could be in order. Tell me if I made sense? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Irish Doggy Posted August 22, 2007 Share Posted August 22, 2007 Alcoholism is a disease. ...as contagious as polio....as contagious as syphilis....as contagious as bubonic plague. Attacking one, but infecting all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.