Chief among those things being our record and now, hat tipped to AOL Fanhouse, some borderline harassment at the hands of the league's drug policy.
And that's what they did, in part, but not all.
So what's up with the psychiatric testing? If you suspect a player used drugs, the first order of business should be establishing that fact (or not). What, exactly, was Washington asked to evaluate psychiatrically during these meetings? Since he hadn't actually failed a drug test, were they hoping he would inadvertently reveal he was tricking the drug test? If he's innocent, doesn't the presence of psychiatric evaluation kind of sort of presume he's using drugs? Also, psychiatrists aren't free.
Washington: I do not know why I'm here.
Psychiatrist: We're worried about your drug problem.
Washington: I do not have a drug problem, nor have I ever failed a test.
Psychiatrist: ORLY again?
Psychiatrist: (He's good) But your urine was diluted.
Psychiatrist: Have you considered drinking less water?
Washington: I'm done with this.
Psychiatrist: That will be $300.
It gets worse:
"They wanted some things from you, and no, I wasn't happy about it. I had to go to New York a couple of times. They wanted me to see the league's psychiatrist. And I pouted a little about that. They wanted you to pee before game day and if you didn't, you weren't playing. They kind of treated you like you were a criminal, and yes, I was definitely mad about that. I always think of myself as a fun person, but last year, there was nothing about it that was fun."
Be strict on drugs, NFL, but do so reasonably. You can prove definitively that a player is or isn't using drugs without resorting to psychiatric humiliation. If your goal is to eliminate excessive hydration though, congratulations are in order: