Reinstated?

Cymon

Well-Known Member
Apr 10, 2006
1,041
-53
83
Ankeny
Oh sorry. I typed that wrong. 2 mornings after smoking in the night. I have heard of this being done multiple times.


This is true. I lived in Minneapolis and got a friend a job interview with the company I worked for. He was a daily pot smoker. I told him he had to take a urine test. He said, "no problem". He smoked weed the day before his interview, went to a head shop and bought some stuff to flush it out of his system. Passed his test the next day. This was over 10 years ago and he still works there.
 

cybsball20

Well-Known Member
Nov 26, 2006
12,735
438
83
Des Moines, IA
This is true. I lived in Minneapolis and got a friend a job interview with the company I worked for. He was a daily pot smoker. I told him he had to take a urine test. He said, "no problem". He smoked weed the day before his interview, went to a head shop and bought some stuff to flush it out of his system. Passed his test the next day. This was over 10 years ago and he still works there.


Tests now can pick up alot of those products used to mask the test and if your sample is overly diluted you have to have a blood test.
 

josh777

Active Member
Apr 13, 2006
738
33
28
Channel 13 news during their sports segment tonight stated that the story co. attorney told them the case has not been dismissed.
 

IcSyU

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2007
28,309
6,981
113
This is true. I lived in Minneapolis and got a friend a job interview with the company I worked for. He was a daily pot smoker. I told him he had to take a urine test. He said, "no problem". He smoked weed the day before his interview, went to a head shop and bought some stuff to flush it out of his system. Passed his test the next day. This was over 10 years ago and he still works there.

I guess I don't know how strict the testing is, but if it was this easy, no pro athletes would ever get caught.
 

KMAC_ATTACK

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2007
2,482
212
63
Waterloo
Turning yourself in for a warrant is not an admission of guilt. It's turning yourself in so the police don't come and arrest you. Have you actually seen these players admit guilt? I haven't.

Apparently you have seen drug test results also. Weird.

Actually, beyond your :jimlad: it was reported that both Hamlin and Banks claimed the illegal items as their possessions.....hmm to me, admission of illegal items is enough guilt for me - maybe not you......

This is purely an Athletic Department procedure, for all we know they could still be suspended by the team... Because of their arrest and the Student Athlete code of conduct they are immediately suspended pending review... Obviously, the review found them able to be reinstated, but they could still be suspended by the Coach/Team.

I'm guessing the search is going to be found illegal as the warrant was based on a "black guy with dreads" smoking by the dumpster... Doesn't sound like probable cause to me.

Completely agree with your first statement and hope that it holds true. Just because they've been reinstated does not mean they get to play. If that holds true, that could send a bigger message to the team. On your second point, totally fail!!!! The investigation began on Sept 9th when the call was made by the narc (who by the way is probably an underage tailgater - but thats another story all together) and the search warrant was not issued until Sept 11....so there goes that idea.....

But dont mistake me, i'm not for turning my back on these kids....i just would like to have discipline set in stone and the players now if they cross that line, that they will pay a price and that price is playing time....nothing else really matters....
 
  • Like
Reactions: CycloneErik

stateofmind

Well-Known Member
Jul 16, 2007
6,635
4,174
113
Ankeny
I had a roommate that must've been dealing while in college. I was gone for a lot of the summer for an intern and when I returned I found things everywhere. After talking with my elderly neighbor, he told me that my house was under suspicion of drug activity. I'm not sure what it takes, but I would've been one of those in a situation like these guys.

Just sit back and relax. Either they are innocent and you have made wrong assumptions about innocent people, or they are guilty and we are forming opinions with VERY little detail.

This thread should drop now. Innocent until proven guilty people. I personally have no idea what to think, but I could care less because I know less than every official presiding. My assumption is that you all know as little as I do and are throwing out opinion on little fact.
 

synapticwave

Active Member
Mar 9, 2007
965
193
43
Austin, TX
www.longshotgames.com
I think it's pretty clear here what is going on. It was CPR and JP's weed, the players are covering for them and now, in return for the player's dedication, the suspensions are being lifted. Good all around work by the entire team, this is exactly how team unity is formed!




:jimlad:
 
  • Like
Reactions: CycloneErik

Stormin

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
45,505
14,383
113
I think everyone needs to chill out a bit and let CPR handle this. It sounds like it was a miniscule amount of weed as in some residue, a couple seeds and a stem. Was it in the carpet or in a drawer? I have moved my son into a couple apartments at college and believe me, they are NOT thoroughly cleaned.

Banks has volunteered to be tested for drugs and says he is clean. And I think that the University is correct under the circumstances to let this matter be resolved by the authorities and CPR and reinstate the athletes.

Take Banks, for example. He is a senior. And let's say that this whole situation is much ado about nothing. Completely overblown. And we keep Banks suspended the whole season. That would be a travesty for that young man. He would have been denied the right to play and yet was not found guilty of anything.

I think these 3 young men must realize that they are ambassadors for ISU and should take extra steps to not be in situations that could be an embarassment or potentially bad. It is stupid that they are in this predicament.

And I while Pot is illegal, I wonder what kind of person calls up the cops because they spy someone smoking a reefer outside. They need to show up at the lots at JTS and bust all the cigarette smokers that are smoking illegally on Iowa State University property. That is illegal also.
 
May 28, 2009
742
23
18
I think everyone needs to chill out a bit and let CPR handle this. It sounds like it was a miniscule amount of weed as in some residue, a couple seeds and a stem. Was it in the carpet or in a drawer? I have moved my son into a couple apartments at college and believe me, they are NOT thoroughly cleaned.

Banks has volunteered to be tested for drugs and says he is clean. And I think that the University is correct under the circumstances to let this matter be resolved by the authorities and CPR and reinstate the athletes.

Take Banks, for example. He is a senior. And let's say that this whole situation is much ado about nothing. Completely overblown. And we keep Banks suspended the whole season. That would be a travesty for that young man. He would have been denied the right to play and yet was not found guilty of anything.

I think these 3 young men must realize that they are ambassadors for ISU and should take extra steps to not be in situations that could be an embarassment or potentially bad. It is stupid that they are in this predicament.

And I while Pot is illegal, I wonder what kind of person calls up the cops because they spy someone smoking a reefer outside. They need to show up at the lots at JTS and bust all the cigarette smokers that are smoking illegally on Iowa State University property. That is illegal also.


Stormin! We agree! Thank you It is what I have been trying to say and have failed miserably.
 

Cydkar

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2006
26,923
12,722
113
Well unfortunately for me it was the only taunt I had left towards Iowa fans by halftime..."Well at least we're not a bunch of criminals."

Pretty weak, I know. But now I have to to change it to "At least none of our players have been indicted on a felon charge!"

It's weak that you brought out any smack talk after that beat down at all.
 

swammi

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2009
1,667
83
48
79
Apollo Beach, Florida
Soesn't the University have the authority to submit these young men to drug testing? If they don't they should. Most employers who run a drug free work place would have that authority.
 

cybsball20

Well-Known Member
Nov 26, 2006
12,735
438
83
Des Moines, IA
Soesn't the University have the authority to submit these young men to drug testing? If they don't they should. Most employers who run a drug free work place would have that authority.


The NCAA, School, and conference can do random drug testing but they don't do that many of them because of the cost. I beleive if there is reasonable suspicion (such as an arrest) they can order up specific players to be tested.
 

rdubbs

Well-Known Member
Feb 12, 2009
2,756
91
48
Central Iowa
No offense, but I for one am sick and tired of why as Cyclone fans we must make decisions on how that makes us stack up to Iowa, or make us look to Iowa fans, etc.

And perhaps if we are not looking to be judged by those we have judged, we should have not judged in the first place.

+1 Exact same can be said on the flip side.
 

DaddyMac

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2006
14,070
453
83
The NCAA, School, and conference can do random drug testing but they don't do that many of them because of the cost. I beleive if there is reasonable suspicion (such as an arrest) they can order up specific players to be tested.

Wouldn't one think the authorities would do a drug test as well? In fact, I would think that they would've given a test in the week between the accusation/search, and the warrant. But who knows....

I think that's the only one that truely matters at the end of the day. I doubt the authorities would simply say ok to a university drug test - regardless of when it was administered.

Presuming they did administor a test and the players passed, you'd think the task force wouldn't have much to go off of. If they failed, you would think that the AD wouldn't be so quick to reinstate (presuming they know the results)

This whole thing is just damn perculiar.
 
Last edited:

Clark

Well-Known Member
Jun 24, 2009
18,463
4,724
113
Altoona
Wouldn't one think the authorities would do a drug test as well? In fact, I would think that they would've given a test in the week between the accusation/search, and the warrant. But who knows....

I think that's the only one that truely matters at the end of the day. I doubt the authorities would simply say ok to a university drug test - regardless of when it was administered.

Presuming they did administor a test and the players passed, you'd think the task force wouldn't have much to go off of. If they failed, you would think that the AD wouldn't be so quick to reinstate (presuming they know the results)

This whole thing is just damn perculiar.

I'm pretty sure the authorities would have to get a warrent in order to test the players.
 

DaddyMac

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2006
14,070
453
83
I'm pretty sure the authorities would have to get a warrent in order to test the players.

Think so?

On first thought, I would too. But then I got to thinking about tests for OWI and such. The don't need a warrant then, do they?

Regardless of the timing, I'd have to think the police gave them a test. They passed or failed. Failed = what is ISU doing, Passed = what is the DA doing?
 

josh777

Active Member
Apr 13, 2006
738
33
28
Good - I'm glad CPR isn't trying to be some cowboy to impress the drill sergeant wing of cyclonefanatic. I'm sure more will come out in due time and in the mean time I will be looking foward to Army.

If any hawk fans try to bust your balls (which is what I'm sensing is the real issue to many of you) you just need to remind them that we don't care about players getting into minor trouble from time to time...we've all been bad and gotten caught. Getting caught twenty some odd times in roughly a year or so with some rape and felony fraud sprinkled in is what our problem was. Not some hawk player that had to much to drink.

So, how do we come up with "20 some odd times" then if we are willing to toss out certain arrests based on their severity? Doesn't that give the Hawks only a couple of "serious" arrests then to mock or judge them on?

Can't have it both ways. Sounds to me like you are willing to sweep this under the rug for the sake of the potential success of a struggling program.
 

Help Support Us

Become a patron