By Gavin Mendoza, Connor Gray, and Ely Noble, Senior Reporters
A positive drug test is one of the worst outcomes for a student-athlete to have. But not all universities handle such situations the same way.
The NCAA has tested for drugs since 1986, and it has changed its testing policy through the years.
Unlike some leagues and anti-doping organizations, the NCAA does not reveal the number of tests it conducts. Players who test positive can be kicked out of championships and can lose a year or more of eligibility.
The NCAA has rules in place that outline permissible and impermissible drugs. Performance-enhancing drugs and marijuana are two of the main prohibited drugs the organization tests for, and the substances are under scrutiny for different reasons.
On the collegiate level, the NCAA administers year-round drug tests. But most of the time, universities conduct the tests themselves, though some will say they do it to avoid scrutiny from the NCAA.
Gavin Lang, the associate athletic director for communications at Oklahoma State University, said results from test conducted by the university are not sent to the NCAA unless they are required. Tests can be ordered for a variety of reasons.
“The number of times a student-athlete is drug tested varies, but generally speaking, drug testing can happen as part of a pre-participation exam, by random selection, at NCAA championship events and more,” Lang said.
Lang said punishments vary based on the type of substance for which an athlete tests positive.
“Punishments for testing positive can vary based on the circumstance and are determined by the athletic director and head coach,” Lang said.
While these are the policies for OSU, athletic administrators at every university can decide how they choose to conduct testing and punish offending athletes. Clemson University, for example, suspended three players four years ago for taking Ostarine, a performance-enhancing drug. Dexter Lawrence, a star defensive tackle, had to miss the playoff games as a result of his positive test.
OFFICIALS CHANGE STANCE
ON MARIJUANA USAGE
For many years, marijuana was treated by the NCAA as one of the worst offenses. But as of last year, this has changed. The NCAA increased the amount to trigger a positive test, and punishments for using marijuana are less severe.
Testing positive once will have student-athletes follow a school’s “management plan and education” protocol. A second positive would not cause the removal of the student’s athletic eligibility but will force the athlete to sit out 25% of the season. A third positive test also will not affect eligibility but could force the athlete to miss up to half of the games.
“Reconsidering the NCAA approach to cannabis testing and management is consistent with feedback from membership on how to better support and educate student-athletes in a society with rapidly evolving public health and cultural views regarding cannabis use,” NCAA Chief Medical Officer Dr. Brian Hainline said in a statement in 2022.
While he does not believe marijuana is a performance-enhancing drug, schools should help student-athletes with substance prevention and support them, Hainline said.
The most severe punishment an athlete could get is a ban for tampering with a drug test.
Former LSU cornerback Kristian Fulton was banned for 730 days for tampering with a test. He attempted to use another player’s urine to pass, but he got caught.
He later had another drug test with his own urine, but it came back clean, which sparked some controversy over his suspension. Though an appeal was made, the NCAA stood by its decision to ban Fulton.
HANDLING TESTING LOCALLY
In addition to NCAA testing, universities have operated their own institutional testing programs independent of the NCAA’s. Universities are required to hand out an annual list of banned drug classes to all student-athletes, including student-athletes who transfer mid-year.
The NCAA encourages schools to do testing on their own time to make sure athletes are clean.
Purdue University follows testing the NCAA has set dates for, and like OSU, Purdue conducts its own random tests throughout the school year to make sure their athletes are not using banned substances.
The NCAA does have medical exceptions for athletes who need a specific drug for documented medical reasons. If that is the case, the NCAA’s designated drug-testing agency will assist with the medical exception process.
Testing done for performance-enhancing drugs and illegal substances is administered at every level of the NCAA.
Jon Thoren – a former collegiate athlete who used to play baseball for Occidental University, a Division III school in Los Angeles, California – said he believes testing is good. However, he was never tested during his playing days.
“My stance is that it should happen and that it’s good, but my school doesn’t really drug test at all,” Thoren said. “They only drug test if you make the conference tourney at end of the year.”
Not all schools test athletes regularly, and the amount of testing differs with each level of competition; 90% of Division I, 65% of Division II and 21% of Division III schools conduct their own drug testing programs.
For Thoren and other Division III athletes, having fewer drug tests is normal compared to higher levels of competition.
Thoren said his school does try to educate athletes, although he said he believes the school only does so because it is required to.
“They cover drugs that are illegal, but only do so at the beginning of the year for protocol reasons,” Thoren said. “They are vague about it and do not keep us updated with specific drugs that are illegal or legal to use.”
SOME SAY PUNISHMENTS
ARE TOO HARSH
When an athlete is punished for using drugs, administrators often face push back. Some people say the punishment is too harsh, especially if the student has never gotten in trouble with drugs before.
“Punishment is good, but not to the level of taking one year. That’s too tough,” Thoren said. “I think the punishment of missing a game or week is better or even just requiring a class to go to or program instead of missing time.”
A baseball player at Adams State University in Colorado, a Division II school, agreed that some punishments are too strict. The athlete spoke on condition of anonymity.
“When we look at the punishment these athletes are receiving, obviously the need for punishment is essential, but there should be a way to maybe earn that trust back and regain a year of eligibility because, while maybe they were in the wrong in the moment, that doesn’t mean people can’t change, especially when their career and passion is on the line,” he said.
He said bans on some performance enhancers should be reevaluated.
“Maybe they could lighten up on the use of performance enhancers, especially at the college football level because, while maybe it enhances your level of play, more often than not, athletes are consuming these drugs to stay on the field longer and all season,” he said.
Similar to Thoren, the athlete at Adams State said he has not been tested and has not seen or heard of many tests.
“I have been here for two semesters and have only seen one drug test at the beginning of the year and have no clue when the next one could be,” he said. “I feel as if the NCAA makes it pretty clear what drugs are prohibited to use as a student-athlete.”
ATHLETIC DIRECTORS SAY
POSITIVE TESTS ARE FEW
To give a better understating of how colleges in Oklahoma approach drug testing for student-athletes, several athletic directors gave insight into their drug-testing programs. They spoke on condition of anonymity.
One athletic director from a Division II school said the school’s drug testing is “very thorough” and is “randomly administered throughout the year.”
The school tests for a wide range of drugs, including performance-enhancing drugs and recreational drugs such as marijuana.
When asked about how often their athletes test positive, the athletic director said that “the vast majority of our student-athletes test negative.”
Another athletic director from a Division II school in the same conference said the school’s drug testing program is “less frequent” than at a Division I school. The director said the university only tests student-athletes once or twice a year, usually before or during the season.
When asked about the effectiveness of their program, the athletic director said the school has had “a handful of positive tests” during the past few years, but officials were able to address the issues with the individual student-athletes.