COACHES' DRUG POLICIES VARY

Some Espouse Zero-Tolerance Approach

Drugs and drug testing in UNC athletics have gained attention in the wake
of the October suspensions of three North Carolina football players charged
with misdemeanor marijuana possession.

The term "two strikes, you're out" has been used in stories about the three
athletes to describe the department's policy: One failed drug test results
in counseling and probation - the second, dismissal.

But the policy is not the same for every team at the University.

"We allow our coaches to have their own team rules," said Larry Gallo,
senior associate athletics director. "They can't be less stringent than our
rules."

Coaches with stricter policies must make their rules known before the
season, Gallo added.

And some Olympic sport coaches have done just that.

Women's lacrosse coach Jenny Levy has a zero tolerance policy when it comes
to recreational drugs.

"The bottom line is Division-I athletes shouldn't be doing drugs," Levy
said. "No one should be doing drugs - it's illegal. When you have federal
government rules in place, I don't know why you would have a
two-strikes-you're-out policy."

Levy said she understands that each coach governs her team how she sees
fit, but she doesn't think the department's policy, which adheres to NCAA
rules, is strict enough.

She has some sympathy for athletes who test positive for banned substances
they unknowingly consume through supplements.

"In the policy, two-strikes-you're-out, it does make a lot of sense," Levy
said. "But if it's a recreational drug that doesn't have any
performance-enhancing background, I really don't think we should have any
tolerance."

Men's lacrosse coach John Haus would not discuss the issue but said he does
not tolerate any possession of or influence of drugs on his team. Haus
added that his team hasn't run into such problems.

Track and field coach Dennis Craddock is familiar with the stigma placed on
his sport when it comes to performance-enhancing drugs.

"We don't hide the fact that we discourage it and that we don't think it
belongs in the sport," he said.

Craddock has a zero-tolerance policy for performance-enhancing drugs and
would immediately dismiss an athlete who failed a test for them, he said.

But he has never dealt with such a situation during his 30-year career.

"(Steroids are) just such a cheat and a lie that give you such an advantage
over the other student athletes," Craddock said. "Whereas the alcohol and
the marijuana actually take away from your performance."

Positive tests for recreational drugs or the suggestion of a problem with
alcohol on Craddock's team might result in counseling.

"If I keep them on the team, then I can require that they get some help,"
said Craddock, whose father was an alcoholic. "If I dismiss them, then I
can't require that they get help."

Craddock described the "two strikes, you're out" policy as a "wait and see"
approach that is better as a department policy than a stricter rule might be.

"Sometimes hard, fast rules can come back to bite you on the butt,"
Craddock said. "But if you've got hard, fast rules, then really it's for
everybody. The superstar is going to get the same treatment as somebody
who's sitting on the bench."

Craddock acknowledged that if one of his athletes got in trouble with the
law while under the influence, he would dismiss that athlete, even if it
was a first offense.

Swimming and diving coach Frank Comfort considers various factors related
to failed drug tests.

"I've had some different policies," Comfort said. "Some of it has to do
with my gut feeling about the type of athletes that we have.

"If I think that I have a problem, I might set the rules a little more
difficult at the beginning of the year, but they'll be covered and they'll
be clear and you'll understand them."

A few years ago, Comfort perceived that he had a problem with athletes
using illegal substances. He suspected some athletes knew ways to get
around the testing regimen.

Comfort asked the department to change the testing assignment process and
immediately found two positive tests. Those swimmers were removed from the
team - it was clearly stated that one positive test was grounds for dismissal.

In the past, the department sent forms for randomly selected athletes to
sign, agreeing to be tested the next day, Comfort said.

"Well, all of a sudden you ended up with a horrible intestinal virus," said
Comfort, adding that not all athletes who missed practice would necessarily
have tested positive.

But there were enough instances to arouse suspicion.

In international swimming, Comfort said, the athlete is not let out of the
inspector's sight until he completes the test. Comfort employs a similar
practice.

Overall, Comfort likes the department's two-chance policy.

"When you're 18 to 22, it's a likelihood you'll do more stupid things than
you will when you're 32," he said. "Hopefully you'll do fewer stupid things
when you're 52."

The slight variation in individual team polices reveals that not all
athletes are treated the same with respect to drug and steroid use.

But the issue has gained increased attention in the minds of athletes.

"As a coach, I see more of it happening and I hear more of these things
than I used to, say, 10 years ago," Craddock said. "But whether it is
really worse than it was 10 years ago, maybe I'm just hearing more."