PDA

View Full Version : Mitch McGary - one toke over the line



Billy Dat
04-25-2014, 09:42 AM
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/mitch-mcgary-heading-to-nba-after-positive-marijuana-test-nets-him-shocking-year-long-ncaa-ban-073833742.html

File this one literally and figuratively under "random". John Beilein decides to suit Mitch McGarry up for the NCAAs thinking that his uniformed presence on the bench will provide some sort of extra juice to propel the Wolverines. As bad luck would have it, Mitch gets chosen as the one kid on the whole team to get urine tested after the game. According to Mitch, he had smoked pot once a few weeks back after resisting numerous offers all season. He tests positive, gets suspended for a year, and is now essentially forced to enter the NBA draft.

Didn't this kid watch "Reefer Madness" and discover that pot can literally ruin your life? When is "Alcohol Madness", "Video Game Madness" and "Social Media Madness" coming out?

Tough break for this kid. I know he's technically in the wrong here, but this situation stinks.

nmduke2001
04-25-2014, 09:47 AM
That is really bad luck.

gumbomoop
04-25-2014, 09:52 AM
Suggest mods merge this with UNC scandal thread.

UNC scandal results in NCAA hammer down on Mitch McGary, as Ghost Scam mysteriously transmogrifies into Reefer Madness.

niveklaen
04-25-2014, 09:52 AM
If that is his claim, he is lying. A single use of THC will process out of the body in 2-3 days. In order for it to linger longer, a user has to smoke large volumes on a regular basis over an extended amount of time so that it builds up in their fat deposits. (note - whether mj should be legal is a separate topic that reasonable people can disagree about, but I always advised my clients against spouting this lie when I was a public defender because the judges had zero tolerence for probationers who tried to snow them and would always revoke anyone who made this claim when confronted with a positive UA...)

Billy Dat
04-25-2014, 09:57 AM
If that is his claim, he is lying. A single use of THC will process out of the body in 2-3 days. In order for it to linger longer, a user has to smoke large volumes on a regular basis over an extended amount of time so that it builds up in their fat deposits. (note - whether mj should be legal is a separate topic that reasonable people can disagree about, but I always advised my clients against spouting this lie when I was a public defender because the judges had zero tolerence for probationers who tried to snow them and would always revoke anyone who made this claim when confronted with a positive UA...)

I, too, assume he is lying about the volume of pot he has smoked. After all, he is now officially auditioning for the NBA and he has to try and put on the best front possible, even though team execs know a lot of NBA players smoke pot. I am sure the worry is related to the potentially ambition-limiting effects of pot than anything else. McGarry isn't exactly an adonis, if I were an NBA GM, I'd be more worried about him sparking and munching and not working out than being some kind of deviant.

JasonEvans
04-25-2014, 10:17 AM
Do you really get a year for testing positive for Marijuana? That seems pretty darn harsh. What if you smoke it in Denver?

McGary will be a poster child for coming out as soon as you can. He was lottery, perhaps high lottery, a year ago. He will be late first round or second round after his injury (and smoke) filled soph season.

-Jason "tough break for him. Seems like a good kid so I hope he succeeds in the League" Evans

superdave
04-25-2014, 10:24 AM
Do you really get a year for testing positive for Marijuana? That seems pretty darn harsh. What if you smoke it in Denver?

McGary will be a poster child for coming out as soon as you can. He was lottery, perhaps high lottery, a year ago. He will be late first round or second round after his injury (and smoke) filled soph season.

-Jason "tough break for him. Seems like a good kid so I hope he succeeds in the League" Evans

From the article:

"During championship tournaments or bowl games, however, the NCAA takes over and now may test not just for PEDs, but all banned drugs classes, including recreational. The NCAA penalties are also harsher.

By failing a test administered by the NCAA, rather than his school, McGary was subject to the draconian Bylaw 18.4.1.5.1, which calls for a player to be "ineligible for a minimum of one calendar year." A second offense, even for just marijuana, results in permanent banishment.

"If it had been a Michigan test, I would've been suspended three games and possibly thought about coming back," McGary said. "I don't have the greatest circumstances to leave right now [due to the injury]. I feel I'm ready, but this pushed it overboard."

Atlanta Duke
04-25-2014, 10:31 AM
Should have gone with the secondary smoke explanation :)

superdave
04-25-2014, 10:43 AM
Should have gone with the secondary smoke explanation :)

It works for snowboarders.

I guess marijuana boils down to whether the NCAA should be policing character or appearance issues. This is certainly not a performance enhancing thing. And it's becoming an increasingly de-criminalized form of recreation. If the NCAA intends to police non-criminal behavior, then I have a few suggestions: players listening to vulgar music on team buses and flights; saggy pants showing off underwear; using campus internet to look at pornography. We might as well go full Church Lady here!

I dont really know how this should be policed, but I am pretty sure schools should ask the NCAA to stay out of it. They get precious little right.

oakvillebluedevil
04-25-2014, 10:55 AM
Tough time to get caught, with the NCAA's new "all you can eat" rule and everything

CrazyNotCrazie
04-25-2014, 10:57 AM
Sorry to hear his career at Michigan has gone up in smoke. I wonder if he looked into claiming it was medicinal to help him heal his injury - I'm sure Bill Walton would vouch for him on that one.

devildeac
04-25-2014, 11:01 AM
Any hand guns or luxury SUV rental agreements found nearby?

:rolleyes:;)

tommy
04-25-2014, 11:02 AM
This is one of the most outrageous sports-related stories I think I can ever remember. I don't think there's one thing funny about it. The consequences of this draconian "policy" and total and complete inflexibility with which it is being applied are so severe to an otherwise upstanding, model student-athlete (isn't that what the NCAA is supposed to be supporting, instead of forcing out of their organization) at first I thought this has to be some sort of delayed April Fool's Joke. This organization wouldn't really do this, would it?

I don't know what Michigan can do to threaten the NCAA in response to this. Probably not much. But this is a real outrage, it's just fundamentally, totally, and completely wrong at every level, and it's the kind of thing that makes people -- lots of them -- want to burn the NCAA to the ground. And rightfully so.

rocketeli
04-25-2014, 11:05 AM
If I'm a NBA GM the problem isn't that "it's just marijuana" it's that despite the possilbe penalties and despite the negative effects on conditioning and motivation when McGary was supposed to be giving his all to the team--he still used and used regularly (a previous poster is correct--you need significant use to come back hot on a pee-test for marijuana--the postive level is set too high for any passive exposure or occasional use to set it off)--that could poin to Mc Gary has a serious substance use issue.

superdave
04-25-2014, 11:12 AM
If I'm a NBA GM the problem isn't that "it's just marijuana" it's that despite the possilbe penalties and despite the negative effects on conditioning and motivation when McGary was supposed to be giving his all to the team--he still used and used regularly (a previous poster is correct--you need significant use to come back hot on a pee-test for marijuana--the postive level is set too high for any passive exposure or occasional use to set it off)--that could poin to Mc Gary has a serious substance use issue.

Oh I am sure he will get asked about it in every interview. And he will be tested a lot at the next level. He also seems to be talented enough and care enough to put this behind him in order to have a long career. Never met McGary, but I'd bet this is the sort of thing that will drive him to be a better player, not make him more cynical and a problem.

FerryFor50
04-25-2014, 11:16 AM
If I'm a NBA GM the problem isn't that "it's just marijuana" it's that despite the possilbe penalties and despite the negative effects on conditioning and motivation when McGary was supposed to be giving his all to the team--he still used and used regularly (a previous poster is correct--you need significant use to come back hot on a pee-test for marijuana--the postive level is set too high for any passive exposure or occasional use to set it off)--that could poin to Mc Gary has a serious substance use issue.

"Giving his all" for his team? He was out all season with a back injury.

ChillinDuke
04-25-2014, 11:29 AM
This is one of the most outrageous sports-related stories I think I can ever remember. I don't think there's one thing funny about it. The consequences of this draconian "policy" and total and complete inflexibility with which it is being applied are so severe to an otherwise upstanding, model student-athlete (isn't that what the NCAA is supposed to be supporting, instead of forcing out of their organization) at first I thought this has to be some sort of delayed April Fool's Joke. This organization wouldn't really do this, would it?

I don't know what Michigan can do to threaten the NCAA in response to this. Probably not much. But this is a real outrage, it's just fundamentally, totally, and completely wrong at every level, and it's the kind of thing that makes people -- lots of them -- want to burn the NCAA to the ground. And rightfully so.

Agreed. This is really dumb. This is a clear net loss for all parties involved.

It's just amazing that an institution like the NCAA can't recognize that. And consistently so.

- Chillin

Henderson
04-25-2014, 11:43 AM
I don't know why the NCAA gives a rip about weed anyway. It's not exactly a performance enhancing drug. Leave that to law enforcement and whichever schools want to police it at whatever level.

And I wouldn't be so quick to question McGary's statement that he smoked weed a little less than two weeks before the test but hadn't otherwise. Positive tests within two weeks of smoking are pretty common. Three is not unheard of. And for serious rasta types, it can be a month or more before they pee clean.

pfrduke
04-25-2014, 11:44 AM
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/mitch-mcgary-heading-to-nba-after-positive-marijuana-test-nets-him-shocking-year-long-ncaa-ban-073833742.html

File this one literally and figuratively under "random". John Beilein decides to suit Mitch McGarry up for the NCAAs thinking that his uniformed presence on the bench will provide some sort of extra juice to propel the Wolverines. As bad luck would have it, Mitch gets chosen as the one kid on the whole team to get urine tested after the game. According to Mitch, he had smoked pot once a few weeks back after resisting numerous offers all season. He tests positive, gets suspended for a year, and is now essentially forced to enter the NBA draft.

Didn't this kid watch "Reefer Madness" and discover that pot can literally ruin your life? When is "Alcohol Madness", "Video Game Madness" and "Social Media Madness" coming out?

Tough break for this kid. I know he's technically in the wrong here, but this situation stinks.

So if he had been in street clothes, he could not have been tested? That's especially cruel luck.

MCFinARL
04-25-2014, 11:46 AM
This is one of the most outrageous sports-related stories I think I can ever remember. I don't think there's one thing funny about it. The consequences of this draconian "policy" and total and complete inflexibility with which it is being applied are so severe to an otherwise upstanding, model student-athlete (isn't that what the NCAA is supposed to be supporting, instead of forcing out of their organization) at first I thought this has to be some sort of delayed April Fool's Joke. This organization wouldn't really do this, would it?

I don't know what Michigan can do to threaten the NCAA in response to this. Probably not much. But this is a real outrage, it's just fundamentally, totally, and completely wrong at every level, and it's the kind of thing that makes people -- lots of them -- want to burn the NCAA to the ground. And rightfully so.

I agree completely. As usual, the rules consider the best interests of the athletes last.

Leaving aside the issue of how much marijuana it takes to fail a drug test, on which I am not knowledgeable (though I will note that, given his injury, the use of marijuana even on several occasions doesn't seem like a major failure in his responsibility to his team and may even have helped him to reduce injury-related pain without legal but more dangerous prescription painkillers), McGarry's handling of this situation is pretty impressive, based on his remarks in the linked article. He is owning it as his own mistake and his own fault, while also pointing out that the severity and inflexibility of the penalty may be inappropriate. The folks in Chapel Hill could take a lesson from this--better to get out in front of the story than to ignore or deny it and let it leak out from some other source.

MCFinARL
04-25-2014, 11:47 AM
So if he had been in street clothes, he could not have been tested? That's especially cruel luck.

No, according to the article, he could have been tested even in street clothes, or even back in Ann Arbor if he didn't come to the game. But one has to think that would be much less likely.

Billy Dat
04-25-2014, 11:48 AM
So if he had been in street clothes, he could not have been tested? That's especially cruel luck.

No, I got that part wrong, see below...

"McGary, however, smoked between the Big Ten and NCAAs. During its tournament, the NCAA can test any player on a roster or in the team's traveling party – even players in street clothes not affecting the outcome of games.

McGary may have worn a uniform for the Tennessee game, but it didn't matter. The NCAA can demand a school test an injured player who remains back on campus."

77devil
04-25-2014, 01:10 PM
Just another example of N.C.A.A. insanity. Smoke a joint and get severely sanctioned. Commit massive academic fraud for over a decade and no big deal. One can hope that the lawsuits and other issues facing the institution will bring about its demise.

CameronBornAndBred
04-25-2014, 02:51 PM
http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/98654/ncaa-airballs-handling-of-mcgary

ESPN's take on it. This quote is maddening. Unlucky timing.


McGary took a drug test on March 28, according to a Yahoo Sports report, after the Wolverines beat Tennessee in the Sweet 16.

One week after that, he was told he tested positive.

On April 15, the NCAA agreed its punishment for street drugs -- a full year’s suspension -- was too severe and decided to reduce the penalty for first-time offenders to half a season.

But McGary failed under the old rule, and even upon appeal was denied.

dukelifer
04-25-2014, 03:02 PM
Just another example of N.C.A.A. insanity. Smoke a joint and get severely sanctioned. Commit massive academic fraud for over a decade and no big deal. One can hope that the lawsuits and other issues facing the institution will bring about its demise.

Colin Cowherd argues that the NCAA officials have a big wheel with sanctions that they spin to decide. Does explain the random nature of the process.

ICP
04-25-2014, 03:05 PM
I might be in a minority here, but I don't think this is too harsh. In fact, I am hoping this will be an example for other athletes to be very reluctant to put harmful (and illegal) substances in their bodies. I think this is particularly important given as colleges ought to educate these young men to grow up to be responsible adults, however old fashioned that might sound to some in today's society.

RoyalBlue08
04-25-2014, 03:23 PM
Sometimes I think the NCAA enjoys the criticism from fans and media. It is really the only explanation for the rules they make. What other purpose could marijuana testing serve? Do they believe schools aren't capable of having their own policies regarding drug testing and possible penalties? How about focusing on clearing steroids out of "amateur athletics"? That is a competitive fairness issue (thus in the NCAA wheelhouse) and I far more important health issue for these young men. Sometimes I wish I didn't love Duke basketball so much because I am so over the NCAA hypocrisy.

dukelifer
04-25-2014, 03:25 PM
I might be in a minority here, but I don't think this is too harsh. In fact, I am hoping this will be an example for other athletes to be very reluctant to put harmful (and illegal) substances in their bodies. I think this is particularly important given as colleges ought to educate these young men to grow up to be responsible adults, however old fashioned that might sound to some in today's society.

I guess the issue here is that the NCAA changed their own penalty for this but he was subject to the old policy. I am not sure if a DWI comes with a year's suspension. One might argue committing a crime should have as big or bigger penalty. Not sure if it does.

sagegrouse
04-25-2014, 03:47 PM
I might be in a minority here, but I don't think this is too harsh. In fact, I am hoping this will be an example for other athletes to be very reluctant to put harmful (and illegal) substances in their bodies. I think this is particularly important given as colleges ought to educate these young men to grow up to be responsible adults, however old fashioned that might sound to some in today's society.

The majority of the citizens of the states of Colorado and Washington disagree with your views. I expect we will see some real reversals in the punishment for marijuana use by both legal and regulatory agencies.

BD80
04-25-2014, 04:14 PM
The penalty was, and though now reduced in half, still is, the same as a positive test for heroin.

tommy
04-25-2014, 04:35 PM
I might be in a minority here, but I don't think this is too harsh. In fact, I am hoping this will be an example for other athletes to be very reluctant to put harmful (and illegal) substances in their bodies. I think this is particularly important given as colleges ought to educate these young men to grow up to be responsible adults, however old fashioned that might sound to some in today's society.

Hello? 1956? The next century is calling . . .

CDu
04-25-2014, 04:47 PM
Tough break for McGary and for Michigan. That being said, I don't have a lot of sympathy for McGary in this situation. He knew the rules. He chose to take the risk that he wouldn't get caught. He got caught.

One can certainly debate whether or not the use marijuana should be illegal. Heck, I agree that it is silly for marijuana to be illegal. But the reality is that, in the state of Michigan (and in most states throughout the country) it IS illegal. And in the eyes of the NCAA, it is against the rules to use it. McGary knew both of those things, yet decided to disobey anyway and put his career in jeopardy. Just not a wise decision on his part. Bad luck for him to get caught, but bad decision to put himself at risk of getting caught.

Duvall
04-25-2014, 04:49 PM
Sometimes I think the NCAA enjoys the criticism from fans and media. It is really the only explanation for the rules they make. What other purpose could marijuana testing serve? Do they believe schools aren't capable of having their own policies regarding drug testing and possible penalties? How about focusing on clearing steroids out of "amateur athletics"? That is a competitive fairness issue (thus in the NCAA wheelhouse) and I far more important health issue for these young men. Sometimes I wish I didn't love Duke basketball so much because I am so over the NCAA hypocrisy.

What point does the marijuana testing of professional and high school athletes serve? This country has been steeped in anti-drug paranoia for decades, and the NCAA would have caught more grief over the years for not having the rule than they will now for enforcing it.

sagegrouse
04-25-2014, 05:02 PM
Hello? 1956? The next century is calling . . .


Tough break for McGary and for Michigan. That being said, I don't have a lot of sympathy for McGary in this situation. He knew the rules. He chose to take the risk that he wouldn't get caught. He got caught.

One can certainly debate whether or not the use marijuana should be illegal. Heck, I agree that it is silly for marijuana to be illegal. But the reality is that, in the state of Michigan (and in most states throughout the country) it IS illegal. And in the eyes of the NCAA, it is against the rules to use it. McGary knew both of those things, yet decided to disobey anyway and put his career in jeopardy. Just not a wise decision on his part. Bad luck for him to get caught, but bad decision to put himself at risk of getting caught.


What point does the marijuana testing of professional and high school athletes serve? This country has been steeped in anti-drug paranoia for decades, and the NCAA would have caught more grief over the years for not having the rule than they will now for enforcing it.

Uhh, guys. I'll cut the NCAA a little slack here. At some point there was widespread insistence that there be a really hard-nosed crackdown on all illegal drug use, without a heckuva lot of discrimination among different drugs (probably 'cuz the pushers handled everything). The harsh penalties are a legacy of that time, and no one has ever accused the NCAA (or any other regulatory body, for that matter) of being agile and nimble.

At the same time, sending hundreds of athletes to bogus courses that receive full "academic" credit has always been against the rules. One will note that the NCAA has diligently pursued enforcement of a truly dumb marijuana penalty but avoided investigating one of the biggest athletic academic scandals ever.

CameronBornAndBred
04-25-2014, 05:19 PM
The penalty was, and though now reduced in half, still is, the same as a positive test for heroin.
If he got stupid and unlucky and tried heroin once right before being tested, then sure, I guess his penalty might be the same. But that is extremely unlikely. It is also unlikely if he were an actual user of heroin that he would be playing ball, much less well enough to be taken in the NBA draft.

ncexnyc
04-25-2014, 05:42 PM
Any hand guns or luxury SUV rental agreements found nearby?

:rolleyes:;)

Color me confused. Am I missing something here? PJ got busted with weed in the car and admits to the officer he is a casual user, but there wasn't any type of ban handed down by the NCAA. Is the only difference between the two cases, that MM got caught through a urine test administered after a game?

oldnavy
04-25-2014, 05:50 PM
Color me confused. Am I missing something here? PJ got busted with weed in the car and admits to the officer he is a casual user, but there wasn't any type of ban handed down by the NCAA. Is the only difference between the two cases, that MM got caught through a urine test administered after a game?

UNC is Teflon and the NCAA is a joke.

Olympic Fan
04-25-2014, 05:54 PM
Color me confused. Am I missing something here? PJ got busted with weed in the car and admits to the officer he is a casual user, but there wasn't any type of ban handed down by the NCAA. Is the only difference between the two cases, that MM got caught through a urine test administered after a game?

The NCAA penalties ONLY kick in for championship competition.

The rest of the year, schools are allowed to administer drug tests under their own rules. The only time the NCAA steps in would be if a school violates its own drug policy. But the NCAA doesn't dictate what that policy should be. The usual rule at most schools is one bad test constitutes a warning. Two strikes and a suspension is involved. three strikes and dismissal -- but it varies.

Only the NCAA is so draconian and to make one failed test a one-year suspension.

The real get tough rules were instituted in the late 1980s, after the Len Bias story exploded ... and the revelations that at least one Villanova player was high as a kite in the 1985 NCAA title game upset of Georgetown. For a while, every starter and two random reserves were tested after every NCAA game, which led to some awkward postgame situations when dehydrated players couldn't pee for an hour or more.

Personally, I support the strongest testing and harsh penalties for PEDs, but I believe the NCAA has NO business checking for recreational drugs -- especially a drug that is starting to be legalized in various places and has long been accepted by a large segment of the population.

ncexnyc
04-25-2014, 06:06 PM
The NCAA penalties ONLY kick in for championship competition.

The rest of the year, schools are allowed to administer drug tests under their own rules. The only time the NCAA steps in would be if a school violates its own drug policy. But the NCAA doesn't dictate what that policy should be. The usual rule at most schools is one bad test constitutes a warning. Two strikes and a suspension is involved. three strikes and dismissal -- but it varies.

Only the NCAA is so draconian and to make one failed test a one-year suspension.

The real get tough rules were instituted in the late 1980s, after the Len Bias story exploded ... and the revelations that at least one Villanova player was high as a kite in the 1985 NCAA title game upset of Georgetown. For a while, every starter and two random reserves were tested after every NCAA game, which led to some awkward postgame situations when dehydrated players couldn't pee for an hour or more.

Personally, I support the strongest testing and harsh penalties for PEDs, but I believe the NCAA has NO business checking for recreational drugs -- especially a drug that is starting to be legalized in various places and has long been accepted by a large segment of the population.

Thank you for explaining the situation to me. Not sure I follow the logic of letting schools have their own standard, but then there isn't very much that the NCAA does do that makes a whole lot of sense.

tommy
04-25-2014, 06:09 PM
Tough break for McGary and for Michigan. That being said, I don't have a lot of sympathy for McGary in this situation. He knew the rules. He chose to take the risk that he wouldn't get caught. He got caught.

One can certainly debate whether or not the use marijuana should be illegal. Heck, I agree that it is silly for marijuana to be illegal. But the reality is that, in the state of Michigan (and in most states throughout the country) it IS illegal. And in the eyes of the NCAA, it is against the rules to use it. McGary knew both of those things, yet decided to disobey anyway and put his career in jeopardy. Just not a wise decision on his part. Bad luck for him to get caught, but bad decision to put himself at risk of getting caught.

With all due respect, it's more than a "tough break" for McGary. This is a potentially career-changing and life-changing sentence. And for all anyone knows, it may have been for taking a single hit off of a joint at a time when he wasn't even an active member of the team.

You can say he knew the rules and chose to take the risk, and he chose to do something illegal. But doesn't the issue of proportionality have to be a factor -- a major factor -- in one's judgment as to whether the sentence was just? We don't cane people for vandalism like they do in Singapore, and we don't cut off their hands for shoplifting. It's 2014. It's simply unjust -- grotesquely unjust -- in today's society, to impose a one year suspension on a first time "offender" for a minor, minor offense, especially when the realistic consequences to his career, and his life, are potentially so profound. It's out-freaking-rageous, and if it had happened to a key Duke player in the same situation -- or even more obviously, to someone you/we know like a family member -- I think we'd all be saying a lot more than "tough break" or "bad luck."

wsb3
04-25-2014, 06:09 PM
Just another example of N.C.A.A. insanity. Smoke a joint and get severely sanctioned. Commit massive academic fraud for over a decade and no big deal. One can hope that the lawsuits and other issues facing the institution will bring about its demise.

I think I just said something along those lines to my wife. But not as eloquently. :)

CameronBornAndBred
04-25-2014, 06:26 PM
Is the only difference between the two cases, that MM got caught through a urine test administered after a game?
Yes.

stals
04-25-2014, 06:34 PM
You know the rules, you take your chances, you lose sometimes.
End of story.
Judgment is everything and lessons are learned.

CDu
04-25-2014, 07:35 PM
With all due respect, it's more than a "tough break" for McGary. This is a potentially career-changing and life-changing sentence. And for all anyone knows, it may have been for taking a single hit off of a joint at a time when he wasn't even an active member of the team.

You can say he knew the rules and chose to take the risk, and he chose to do something illegal. But doesn't the issue of proportionality have to be a factor -- a major factor -- in one's judgment as to whether the sentence was just? We don't cane people for vandalism like they do in Singapore, and we don't cut off their hands for shoplifting. It's 2014. It's simply unjust -- grotesquely unjust -- in today's society, to impose a one year suspension on a first time "offender" for a minor, minor offense, especially when the realistic consequences to his career, and his life, are potentially so profound. It's out-freaking-rageous, and if it had happened to a key Duke player in the same situation -- or even more obviously, to someone you/we know like a family member -- I think we'd all be saying a lot more than "tough break" or "bad luck."

Firstly, it almost certainly wasn't a single hit off a joint, as many have already noted. You don't test positive based on a single hit off a joint.

But beyond that issue, he knew the rules. It simply doesn't matter if the rules are draconian. If they are the rules, you have to follow them or risk suffering the consequences. He chose to play college basketball, and with that choice comes some explicit limitations to go with the inherent privileges. One of those limitations is that you can't do drugs. Yes, the punishment is harsh. But he made the choice to do it knowing the potential consequences. Such is life.

And if it happened to a Duke player or a family member, I'd be equally disappointed and have the same response. It was a stupid thing for him to do. It definitely stinks for him, but I feel no remorse for him. There are lots of other ways to get your kicks without putting your eligibility at risk. If he didn't want to get suspended, all he had to do was not smoke pot.

ICP
04-25-2014, 09:00 PM
Hello? 1956? The next century is calling . . .

No need to get sarcastic, that's kind of silly of you given that no one can really predict the future so we don't know how our society's views and our scientific research on this issue will evolve...

As other pointed out, this is still very illegal. It is also still considered harmful by the latest scientific research, as you can read in the paragraph below.

Here is the latest scientific data from January 2014 on the harmful effects of it, courtesy of the government's official National Institute for Drug Abuse:
http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana
Marijuana also affects brain development, and when it is used heavily by young people, its effects on thinking and memory may last a long time or even be permanent. A recent study of marijuana users who began using in adolescence revealed substantially reduced connectivity among brain areas responsible for learning and memory. And a large long-term study in New Zealand showed that people who began smoking marijuana heavily in their teens lost an average of 8 points in IQ between age 13 and age 38. Importantly, the lost cognitive abilities were not fully restored in those who quit smoking marijuana as adults. Those who started smoking marijuana in adulthood did not show significant IQ declines.

MCFinARL
04-25-2014, 09:17 PM
Firstly, it almost certainly wasn't a single hit off a joint, as many have already noted. You don't test positive based on a single hit off a joint.

But beyond that issue, he knew the rules. It simply doesn't matter if the rules are draconian. If they are the rules, you have to follow them or risk suffering the consequences. He chose to play college basketball, and with that choice comes some explicit limitations to go with the inherent privileges. One of those limitations is that you can't do drugs. Yes, the punishment is harsh. But he made the choice to do it knowing the potential consequences. Such is life.

And if it happened to a Duke player or a family member, I'd be equally disappointed and have the same response. It was a stupid thing for him to do. It definitely stinks for him, but I feel no remorse for him. There are lots of other ways to get your kicks without putting your eligibility at risk. If he didn't want to get suspended, all he had to do was not smoke pot.

Well, yes, rules are rules. And McGarry took a stupid risk and lost. He admitted as much, and he has never said he shouldn't experience some consequences. But can't justice be tempered with mercy? Given that the NCAA changed its own rule only two weeks after McGarry failed this test, their unwillingness to even consider imposing the new penalty of a half-year suspension rather than the full-year suspension seems both self-righteous and self-important (not that self-importance from the NCAA should be a surprise). And, while I understand that from one perspective each violation should be considered on its own terms, without comparison to what happens in other situations, it's hard not to be a little offended by the NCAA's extreme diligence and rigidity in cases where an individual athlete is the only one who pays and its sometimes much laxer standards when an institution (especially one with a big following) is at risk.

JPtheGame
04-25-2014, 09:55 PM
Sometimes I thank god.....for unanswered prayers.
I really wanted this kid for Duke. Despite the insidious lowering of societal standards that is making marijuana use ok, Duke would have still taken a major hit (get it) from the folks who look for any and every opportunity to besmirch K. Bullet dodged.

BD80
04-25-2014, 10:24 PM
Sometimes I thank god.....for unanswered prayers.
I really wanted this kid for Duke. Despite the insidious lowering of societal standards that is making marijuana use ok, Duke would have still taken a major hit (get it) from the folks who look for any and every opportunity to besmirch K. Bullet dodged.

Meeza thinks yoooza gonna need a tall ladder to getsa down from that horse, betcha betcha.


Just a thought. Once McGary realized he was busted (he probably didn't realize that he could be tested while not dressed, and once he was told/asked to dress it was too late) he waited until the results came back to let the NCAA take the blame for him going pro. This way he gets the bump for appearing to want to stay in college and develop and not appear to be just another kid trying to make money quicker. He avoids the microscope of a do-or-die year where he would be the focal point of opposing teams, and the NBA teams are left with last year's tournament run as the only measuring stick in competition. He can avoid pre-draft workouts as he is still recovering from back surgery. He may get into the first round on potential alone.

tommy
04-26-2014, 12:47 AM
Sometimes I thank god.....for unanswered prayers.
I really wanted this kid for Duke. Despite the insidious lowering of societal standards that is making marijuana use ok, Duke would have still taken a major hit (get it) from the folks who look for any and every opportunity to besmirch K. Bullet dodged.

No it's not "bullet dodged." Because there is no rational way to presume that every decision made and every circumstance and every piece of luck, good and bad, all of which in a unique combination led to McGary smoking pot at the time he did and getting tested when he did, would have been duplicated had he enrolled two years ago at Duke. Many, many, many links in the chain which led to this, including basketball-related links, personal, family, probably social life, academic, physical, and the list could go on and on. Had he enrolled at Duke (or any other school) it is highly likely many, many decisions would have differed, certainly things that happened to him would've been different and therefore his reactions would've been different (or at least could've been) -- the combinations and permutations of links in the chain are infinite. Maybe following all those links, one by one, would have led to McGary being a total pothead. Or to him never touching the stuff. Or somewhere in between. We'll never know. Heck, maybe if the guy down the hall in Apt. 2D hadn't happened to come out of his door at the same instant McGary came out his door and they said hello and ended up hanging out and smoking a joint together - if that guy had slept in 10 minutes longer and didn't come out of his door at the time he did, then this whole thing doesn't happen. If Michigan had been upset in the round before the Tennessee game, such that the Tennessee game was never played, this doesn't happen. It's called life. You can't say at all that his fate would have been the same had he chosen a different college. Life doesn't work that way. Check out the movie Sliding Doors. One seemingly insignificant event or decision, had it gone the other way, can change the entire course of your life.

g-money
04-26-2014, 01:13 AM
After reading this story, my first thought is: Who in the world is driving the NCAA bus these days? Have they lost all touch with reality??

JPtheGame
04-26-2014, 02:19 AM
No it's not "bullet dodged." Because there is no rational way to presume that every decision made and every circumstance and every piece of luck, good and bad, all of which in a unique combination led to McGary smoking pot at the time he did and getting tested when he did, would have been duplicated had he enrolled two years ago at Duke. Many, many, many links in the chain which led to this, including basketball-related links, personal, family, probably social life, academic, physical, and the list could go on and on. Had he enrolled at Duke (or any other school) it is highly likely many, many decisions would have differed, certainly things that happened to him would've been different and therefore his reactions would've been different (or at least could've been) -- the combinations and permutations of links in the chain are infinite. Maybe following all those links, one by one, would have led to McGary being a total pothead. Or to him never touching the stuff. Or somewhere in between. We'll never know. Heck, maybe if the guy down the hall in Apt. 2D hadn't happened to come out of his door at the same instant McGary came out his door and they said hello and ended up hanging out and smoking a joint together - if that guy had slept in 10 minutes longer and didn't come out of his door at the time he did, then this whole thing doesn't happen. If Michigan had been upset in the round before the Tennessee game, such that the Tennessee game was never played, this doesn't happen. It's called life. You can't say at all that his fate would have been the same had he chosen a different college. Life doesn't work that way. Check out the movie Sliding Doors. One seemingly insignificant event or decision, had it gone the other way, can change the entire course of your life.

That was clearly my point. What a fun and interesting way to kill a conversation.

oldnavy
04-26-2014, 06:31 AM
Firstly, it almost certainly wasn't a single hit off a joint, as many have already noted. You don't test positive based on a single hit off a joint.

But beyond that issue, he knew the rules. It simply doesn't matter if the rules are draconian. If they are the rules, you have to follow them or risk suffering the consequences. He chose to play college basketball, and with that choice comes some explicit limitations to go with the inherent privileges. One of those limitations is that you can't do drugs. Yes, the punishment is harsh. But he made the choice to do it knowing the potential consequences. Such is life.

And if it happened to a Duke player or a family member, I'd be equally disappointed and have the same response. It was a stupid thing for him to do. It definitely stinks for him, but I feel no remorse for him. There are lots of other ways to get your kicks without putting your eligibility at risk. If he didn't want to get suspended, all he had to do was not smoke pot.

I agree and I also often disagree with the argument that society has "evolved" such that we should be more tolerant of destructive behaviors. The social mores of the past were not so bad, and one is hard pressed to say that we are better off in terms of societal behavior and overall emotional well being of our citizenry than we were back in the 1950's. In fact I suspect that the rates of just about every destructive type behavior and outcome would be higher now than they were back then. We have made tremendous progress in some areas but have slipped badly in many, many other more fundamental and important areas.

This is a bit off the point, but to make the argument that this is "2014" as if that actually means anything good is a little weak IMO.

However, saying that I do believe that the punishment that McGary received from the NCAA was overkill and given the fact that they recognize that the punishment is overkill, by reducing it just days ago, they should have the good since to make the ruling retroactive at least. But the NCAA isn't known for showing good sense are they?

Reilly
04-26-2014, 07:04 AM
... there is no rational way to presume that every decision made and every circumstance and every piece of luck, good and bad, all of which in a unique combination led to McGary smoking pot at the time he did and getting tested when he did, would have been duplicated had he enrolled two years ago at Duke. Many, many, many links in the chain which led to this, including basketball-related links, personal, family, probably social life, academic, physical, and the list could go on and on. Had he enrolled at Duke (or any other school) it is highly likely many, many decisions would have differed, certainly things that happened to him would've been different and therefore his reactions would've been different (or at least could've been) -- the combinations and permutations of links in the chain are infinite. Maybe following all those links, one by one, would have led to McGary being a total pothead. Or to him never touching the stuff. Or somewhere in between. We'll never know. Heck, maybe if the guy down the hall in Apt. 2D hadn't happened to come out of his door at the same instant McGary came out his door and they said hello and ended up hanging out and smoking a joint together - if that guy had slept in 10 minutes longer and didn't come out of his door at the time he did, then this whole thing doesn't happen ...

I agree with this -- no way to know for sure. And yet I also firmly believe leopards don't change their spots, human nature doesn't change much, and individuals fundamental natures don't change much (usually don't -- sometimes they do). Think about it in terms of recruiting and basketball skills: what if Grant Hill, Shane Battier, Ricky Price, Tyler Thornton, whomever had gone to a different school. Their individual links in the chain would all be totally different (different coaches, teammates, dorm-mates, whatever) ... yet I believe the great majority of these Duke players -- of all Duke players -- would still be considered the same type of players that we consider them today, b/c their fundamental natures as players and people are, well, fundamental. No way to prove such a theory, of course.

Heard the author Tom Wofe give a talk one time saying when we are born, we're like a Polaroid picture (the 'shake it shake it' variety): the outlines are already there, the pictures just develop over time. That's not true in every case, and people can and do radically transform their lives and circumstances, but I think it's more true than not.

Also, all of us have within us the capacity for good, bad, boneheadedness, risky behavior, industriousness, sloth, whatever ... it's just that I believe our individual pie charts are generally already set ... environment and randomness can play a part in which part of the pie chart we live in (or get caught in) at any particular moment ... yet the pie charts are pretty well set and so certain folks will have a tendency to do x or y no matter the circumstances, although there can always be exceptions.

Is the guy down the hall in Apt. 2D a UNC player?

How many players did the NCAA test this tournament? How many got caught?

Buckeye Devil
04-26-2014, 07:38 AM
I agree and I also often disagree with the argument that society has "evolved" such that we should be more tolerant of destructive behaviors. The social mores of the past were not so bad, and one is hard pressed to say that we are better off in terms of societal behavior and overall emotional well being of our citizenry than we were back in the 1950's. In fact I suspect that the rates of just about every destructive type behavior and outcome would be higher now than they were back then. We have made tremendous progress in some areas but have slipped badly in many, many other more fundamental and important areas.

This is a bit off the point, but to make the argument that this is "2014" as if that actually means anything good is a little weak IMO.

However, saying that I do believe that the punishment that McGary received from the NCAA was overkill and given the fact that they recognize that the punishment is overkill, by reducing it just days ago, they should have the good since to make the ruling retroactive at least. But the NCAA isn't known for showing good sense are they?

Thank you for concisely saying what I wanted to concisely say.

Atlanta Duke
04-26-2014, 09:20 AM
You know the rules, you take your chances, you lose sometimes.
End of story.
Judgment is everything and lessons are learned.

True that if you are a player.

OTOH if you run a corrupt athletic program at a NCAA member institution where credits for classes are passed out like cereal box tops and coaches with a history of violating NCAA rules are rewarded with multi-million dollar contracts - not so much.

Henderson
04-26-2014, 10:27 AM
You know the rules, you take your chances, you lose sometimes.
End of story.
Judgment is everything and lessons are learned.

I think this misses the point. The problem is the rule. And the lack of judgment by the NCAA. But the NCAA has clearly learned its lesson to some extent and changed the rule. Shame they applied an unjust rule in this case. Again, lack of judgment.

Dukehky
04-26-2014, 12:29 PM
Sometimes I thank god.....for unanswered prayers.
I really wanted this kid for Duke. Despite the insidious lowering of societal standards that is making marijuana use ok, Duke would have still taken a major hit (get it) from the folks who look for any and every opportunity to besmirch K. Bullet dodged.

Just for the record, I think this is all ridiculous. The NCAA is going to implode in the next ten years and I cannot wait.

Also, what if this had been one of the kids on Duke's team? You would be flipping out that he got a year's suspension. I have seen, with my own two eyes athletes that play a sport all of us watch for a school that all of us like smoking weed during the season. Unlike the UNC excuse that the cheating happens everywhere (it doesn't), college athletes smoking pot does happen EVERYWHERE. I honestly don't know how more kids don't fail this test.