Williams boys CAN be suspended

[Tony Oday]

http://www.twincities.com/ci_15030613

[BlueBrewer]

Do you think that if this suspension goes forward that it will in any way affect Lord Favre's decision?

[RashanGary]

Well deserved!

[MadScientist]

Looks like they are appealing this ruling so it may well drag on another year or more. It looks like they will drag this thing out until the older Williams retires.
And the younger Williams retires.
And the new stadium is built.
And the new stadium gets so old it needs replacing.
And BF retires (maybe).

[pbmax]

Just hold your horses. There is going to be an appeal.

[RashanGary]

The Vikings window is right now, and after this year I think it could close fast. They don't have a whole lot of young ascending talent and a lot of their best talent is either aging or at best, plateauing. It's now or never for the Vikings. It's to their benefit to keep appealing. Ultimately, I think this is just a matter of when they're suspended, not if they're suspended.

[hoosier]

Is the appeal guaranteed to be heard or could the State appeals court refuse to hear it? If it's guaranteed then that probably means a long, slow process. But if it could be rejected outright then there is still hope that they will be made to serve the suspension before reaching retirement age.

[Tony Oday]

The Minnesota Court of Appeals can decide to transfer the case to MN Supreme Court..which is what they should do...because this is taking up a lot of court resources.

[retailguy]

What happens if the Vikings move to LA?

[Gunakor]

What happens if the Vikings move to LA?

Roger Goodell will be able to do his job.

[Tony Oday]

What happens if the Vikings move to LA?

Roger Goodell will be able to do his job.

No it still is a lawsuit in MN because the incident happened there.

[Gunakor]

What happens if the Vikings move to LA?

Roger Goodell will be able to do his job.

No it still is a lawsuit in MN because the incident happened there.

If the Vikings move to LA this case doesn't have any lasting effect on the NFL's anti-doping policy regardless of the outcome. That's what I meant.

[pbmax]

Is the appeal guaranteed to be heard or could the State appeals court refuse to hear it? If it's guaranteed then that probably means a long, slow process. But if it could be rejected outright then there is still hope that they will be made to serve the suspension before reaching retirement age.
They are holding a hearing about issuing a stay at 2 PM. The stay would keep the NFL from imposing the suspension until the appeals court decides to hear the appeal.

[red]

this is total bull shit IMO

they cheated according to NFL rules, they took the stuff. every other player on every othert team would have been suspended for what they did

the vikings are clearly gaining a huge advantage because of this whole thing dragging out for so long

i say if the courts find that they can be suspended the the nfl needs to punish them a lot more then the 4 games they were going to be suspended

hammer them hard rodger, make a giant statement

[Tony Oday]

http://www.twincities.com/ci_15030613

Suspended!

[Tony Oday]

I spoke too soon the judge is taking two weeks to review the injunction per Fox Sports

[packerbacker1234]

Doubtful it plays too much of a role in Favre's decision. It's on the other side of the ball, and it's not like if it goes through they are gone all year. In fact, they will most likely be better rested for the long haul.

If it was 2 or 3 OL getting in trouble... I could see that being a factor, but since it's on defense and they will be back after what, 4 games if it goes through? Meh, no biggie.


I love all the shit with drugs and PE, it's as if people forgot that chances are... a lot of NFL players take them and are never caught.

[mngolf19]

this is total bull shit IMO

they cheated according to NFL rules, they took the stuff. every other player on every othert team would have been suspended for what they did

the vikings are clearly gaining a huge advantage because of this whole thing dragging out for so long

i say if the courts find that they can be suspended the the nfl needs to punish them a lot more then the 4 games they were going to be suspended

hammer them hard rodger, make a giant statement

Red, the Saints have 2 players awaiting this decision as well. The NFL is also looking at allowing them to serve consecutively so as to not affect the team so harshly. They could do the same with the Williams's. And the Vikes have stood behind the league's decision while also supporting the players right to appeal.

This will be Pat's last season and if this goes to the State Supreme Court then Pat will never see a suspension.

[mngolf19]

The Vikings window is right now, and after this year I think it could close fast. They don't have a whole lot of young ascending talent and a lot of their best talent is either aging or at best, plateauing. It's now or never for the Vikings. It's to their benefit to keep appealing. Ultimately, I think this is just a matter of when they're suspended, not if they're suspended.

Keep dreaming.

[Bretsky]

The Vikings window is right now, and after this year I think it could close fast. They don't have a whole lot of young ascending talent and a lot of their best talent is either aging or at best, plateauing. It's now or never for the Vikings. It's to their benefit to keep appealing. Ultimately, I think this is just a matter of when they're suspended, not if they're suspended.


Didn't you say the same thing last year ?

[Lurker64]

The Vikings window is right now, and after this year I think it could close fast. They don't have a whole lot of young ascending talent and a lot of their best talent is either aging or at best, plateauing. It's now or never for the Vikings. It's to their benefit to keep appealing. Ultimately, I think this is just a matter of when they're suspended, not if they're suspended.

Keep dreaming.

Well, the real question the Vikings are going to have in a year or two is "what to do with the QB position", since I doubt that Tarvaris or Sage are ever going to be able to pilot a high powered passing attack that drove the Vikings ship last year. There's also some concern about the left side of the OL longterm, which was the strength of the Vikings for many years, but McKinnie is a perennial knucklehead who might wear out his welcome, and Hutchinson is getting up there in age. I agree that Pat is pretty much done after this year, and I think there will be a dropoff but not too much of one. There's some concerns in the secondary long term, but honestly Tampa 2 corners are pretty interchangeable. The real personnel issue is linebackers, but Lieber and Greenway are pretty solid, so the real question is how will Henderson recover from his injury and/or how much of a dropoff is there with Brinkley.

The Vikings defense should continue to be pretty decent years into the future, but the offense will have its ups and downs. I think the real question about "how close to closing is this window" is "how many effective years does Peterson have remaining?" He's 24, and takes more punishment than the average NFL running back when he runs. I'd put it at about 5 years at the going rate, but who knows? Then again, will he ever go back to being the player he was 2-3 years ago, as opposed to last year? Who knows?

[Patler]

I think the real question about "how close to closing is this window" is "how many effective years does Peterson have remaining?" He's 24, and takes more punishment than the average NFL running back when he runs. I'd put it at about 5 years at the going rate, but who knows? Then again, will he ever go back to being the player he was 2-3 years ago, as opposed to last year? Who knows?

That will be an interesting thing to watch. Many RBs come and go very quickly. Only the rare ones are still "special" in the 5-10 year range. Others go downhill quickly after about 5 years. He is going into his 4th season and has over 900 NFL carries already. His average has declined noticeably each year (5.6 to 4.8 to 4.4).

[Scott Campbell]

That will be an interesting thing to watch. Many RBs come and go very quickly. Only the rare ones are still "special" in the 5-10 year range. Others go downhill quickly after about 5 years. He is going into his 4th season and has over 900 NFL carries already. His average has declined noticeably each year (5.6 to 4.8 to 4.4).


The 4th season is where the wheels came off for John Brockington.

[MadScientist]

That will be an interesting thing to watch. Many RBs come and go very quickly. Only the rare ones are still "special" in the 5-10 year range. Others go downhill quickly after about 5 years. He is going into his 4th season and has over 900 NFL carries already. His average has declined noticeably each year (5.6 to 4.8 to 4.4).


The 4th season is where the wheels came off for John Brockington.
Wasn't that also related to a new coach who took away his bread and butter play?

24 isn't that old, even for a feature RB. Defenses have geared up to stop him, so he doesn't run free as often. I would like to see him decline because of the team he plays for, but I don't expect it to happen real soon. Hopefully he can keep his fumbles high, reducing his carries.

[Patler]

24 isn't that old, even for a feature RB. Defenses have geared up to stop him, so he doesn't run free as often. I would like to see him decline because of the team he plays for, but I don't expect it to happen real soon. Hopefully he can keep his fumbles high, reducing his carries.

SI had a great article a few years ago, which I wish I had kept, analyzing the life of an NFL RB. Their conclusion was that age had less to do with it than total carries in college and the pros. They analyzed a lot of backs, and most fell into a relatively small window for career carries when they transitioned from better than most to just average. The ones who had longer pro careers had far fewer carries in college and/or fewer carries per year in the NFL. The ones who flamed out sooner in the NFL racked up a lot of carries very young, but overall the total carries in college and the NFL were strikingly similar.

I don't remember the magic number.

[Patler]

Duplicate post.

[gbgary]

i don't understand the point of the suit. how and what civil rights were denied, and even if they were somehow, what's that got to do with failing the test? failed test = suspension.

[mngolf19]

I think the real question about "how close to closing is this window" is "how many effective years does Peterson have remaining?" He's 24, and takes more punishment than the average NFL running back when he runs. I'd put it at about 5 years at the going rate, but who knows? Then again, will he ever go back to being the player he was 2-3 years ago, as opposed to last year? Who knows?

That will be an interesting thing to watch. Many RBs come and go very quickly. Only the rare ones are still "special" in the 5-10 year range. Others go downhill quickly after about 5 years. He is going into his 4th season and has over 900 NFL carries already. His average has declined noticeably each year (5.6 to 4.8 to 4.4).

Could also be the reason they drafted Gerhart.

[get louder at lambeau]

i don't understand the point of the suit. how and what civil rights were denied, and even if they were somehow, what's that got to do with failing the test? failed test = suspension.

As far as I understand it, the rights that were violated were about how the NFL notified the players, or actually how they didn't notify them within 3 days as required by MN law. As far as what it has to do with failing the test, the judge ruled that it didn't cause damages to the players and that the suspensions could be enacted.

[packrulz]

This isn't over: http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8181894d&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

[pbmax]

Its on hold again. Pat Williams may have to be suspended while in retirement.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/05/21/pat-and-kevin-williams-win-another-injunction/

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/05/21/latest-starcaps-decision-likely-means-williamses-will-be-available-all-year/

[Rastak]

The NFL gets blasted by the judge again......from the decision on the restraining order.....



3. No substantial harm will come to the NFL.
The NFL will not be substantially harmed by a stay of dissolution of the temporary restraining order pending appeal. Defendant argues that it will suffer irreparable harm. Defendant claims that granting a stay pending appeal would send the wrong message to young fans and skew the competition. Defendants also argue that a stay would pose a disadvantage to other players who attained their playing weight without using banned substances, as well as other teams whose players already served their suspensions for using Bumetanide or other prohibited substances.
Defendant could have easily avoided this very situation by informing players or teams about what it already knew – that Star Caps contained a hidden, dangerous substance. Defendant knew that many players were already inadvertently ingesting Bumetanide, and continued to place the health, safety, and welfare of its players in jeopardy, so that Adolpho Birch could play a game of gotcha. The league clearly allowed a half dozen other players to use Bumetanide without punishment. Granting a stay pending appeal would not cause Defendant irreparable harm, it would only affect Defendant‟s ability to immediately sanction Plaintiffs and would not affect the general enforceability its anti-doping policy. This Court finds that Defendant would suffer no harm by the continued imposition of an injunction during appeal.

[red]

this is ridiculous

what else can the nfl do about this?

can they make the queens forfeit games that the fat asses play in?

you can't allow one team to operate in a state where random testing isn't allowed. that means they can get away with whatever they want. can the nfl kick the team out of the nfl, or push for a move to LA?

they broke the rules, period. every other player from every other team can be suspended for doing the same thing. IMO the NFL absolutely can not allow one team to skirt the rules

[RashanGary]

That's not surprising. The state law that the NFL broke has nothing to do with whether these two are broke their agreement, but in our system, there are many opportunities to appeal and that's how it should be handled during an appeal.

[Rastak]

this is ridiculous

what else can the nfl do about this?

can they make the queens forfeit games that the fat asses play in?

you can't allow one team to operate in a state where random testing isn't allowed. that means they can get away with whatever they want. can the nfl kick the team out of the nfl, or push for a move to LA?

they broke the rules, period. every other player from every other team can be suspended for doing the same thing. IMO the NFL absolutely can not allow one team to skirt the rules

How about a little outrage over the 8 guys they let skate? Did they break the rules? Well?

[RashanGary]

Doesn't matter, Rastak. It's a matter of time. Law grants them the right to appeal, but these guys broke their agreement fair and square. Whether the NFL let the first 8 off or not, these guys broke it, the NFL added a whole appendix to their steroid and related substance agreement and now they're enforcing it.

There is going to be a lot of whining about fair this, or unethical that. At the end of the day, these guys will be suspended, it's just a matter of what day they run out of appeals. If they didn't like the agreement, they shouldn't have signed it.

[ThunderDan]

this is ridiculous

what else can the nfl do about this?

can they make the queens forfeit games that the fat asses play in?

you can't allow one team to operate in a state where random testing isn't allowed. that means they can get away with whatever they want. can the nfl kick the team out of the nfl, or push for a move to LA?

they broke the rules, period. every other player from every other team can be suspended for doing the same thing. IMO the NFL absolutely can not allow one team to skirt the rules

How about a little outrage over the 8 guys they let skate? Did they break the rules? Well?

Suspend them all.

I liked DeMaurice Smith's comment, "I don't have any sympathy for players who violate the NFL drug policy." (Or someting very similar to that)

Welcome back Rastak.

[red]

this is ridiculous

what else can the nfl do about this?

can they make the queens forfeit games that the fat asses play in?

you can't allow one team to operate in a state where random testing isn't allowed. that means they can get away with whatever they want. can the nfl kick the team out of the nfl, or push for a move to LA?

they broke the rules, period. every other player from every other team can be suspended for doing the same thing. IMO the NFL absolutely can not allow one team to skirt the rules

How about a little outrage over the 8 guys they let skate? Did they break the rules? Well?

are you talking about the other star caps guys?

how can you suspend those guys when state law is protecting two others that violated the same rules?

[Rastak]

this is ridiculous

what else can the nfl do about this?

can they make the queens forfeit games that the fat asses play in?

you can't allow one team to operate in a state where random testing isn't allowed. that means they can get away with whatever they want. can the nfl kick the team out of the nfl, or push for a move to LA?

they broke the rules, period. every other player from every other team can be suspended for doing the same thing. IMO the NFL absolutely can not allow one team to skirt the rules

How about a little outrage over the 8 guys they let skate? Did they break the rules? Well?

are you talking about the other star caps guys?

how can you suspend those guys when state law is protecting two others that violated the same rules?

Did you read what I posted on the ruling? Have you followed the case? The NFL caught 8 guys a few years ago and did NOTHING. Not one was suspended. The judge referred to that in his ruling. It was also mentioned point blank in the federal ruling. The rules are applied arbitrarily already.

[pbmax]

this is ridiculous

what else can the nfl do about this?

can they make the queens forfeit games that the fat asses play in?

you can't allow one team to operate in a state where random testing isn't allowed. that means they can get away with whatever they want. can the nfl kick the team out of the nfl, or push for a move to LA?

they broke the rules, period. every other player from every other team can be suspended for doing the same thing. IMO the NFL absolutely can not allow one team to skirt the rules
If the NFL cannot abide by the law, haven't they broken the rules too? The two issues that Larson found the NFL in violation are easily remedied in the future. It has not made random testing impossible at all.

[sharpe1027]

Did you read what I posted on the ruling? Have you followed the case? The NFL caught 8 guys a few years ago and did NOTHING. Not one was suspended. The judge referred to that in his ruling. It was also mentioned point blank in the federal ruling. The rules are applied arbitrarily already.

So they aren't allowed to enforce a drug policy because they let some guys go in the past? Why don't you try that argument if you ever get pulled over for speeding..."I'm sorry officer, but the PD let 8 people off with only warnings last year so you can't write me at ticket." I bet that doesn't get you very far. :lol:

Baseball had many of their best players on steroids a few years ago and did almost nothing to enforce the steroid policy. I suppose that means that their decision to start enforcing the drug policy more forcefully lately might also be considered arbitrary. That doesn't mean it is the wrong thing to do.

[Scott Campbell]

Looks like they're getting pretty good at working the legal system over there in Viking land:

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/94853104.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD 3aPc:_Yyc:aUUI

[packerbacker1234]

yeah, I am sure they have top notch lawyers too. I assume they know no matter what, in the end, they are most likely going to lose. I don't think they care. I think they like to find all the loopholes they can to not miss any games while they are still playing.

Honestly, I can't argue against that thought process. Even if they knew what was in Star Caps (they aren't the only ones, other players took it too), it still highly doubtful it had any effect on the field, or any negative effect health wise. So... it's all silly to begin with. According to the reports, they weren't even using them that long.

In teh end, I hope they don't get suspended and I hope #4 comes back. In fact, I almost hope #4 has a phenominal game against the packers.

That way it will make the victory that much sweeter. beating the vikings at full strength with favre at his best... there can be no sweeter reward.

Okay, maybe a pick 6 to end the game from ol' 4.

[packerbacker1234]

yeah, I am sure they have top notch lawyers too. I assume they know no matter what, in the end, they are most likely going to lose. I don't think they care. I think they like to find all the loopholes they can to not miss any games while they are still playing.

Honestly, I can't argue against that thought process. Even if they knew what was in Star Caps (they aren't the only ones, other players took it too), it still highly doubtful it had any effect on the field, or any negative effect health wise. So... it's all silly to begin with. According to the reports, they weren't even using them that long.

In teh end, I hope they don't get suspended and I hope #4 comes back. In fact, I almost hope #4 has a phenominal game against the packers.

That way it will make the victory that much sweeter. beating the vikings at full strength with favre at his best... there can be no sweeter reward.

Okay, maybe a pick 6 to end the game from ol' 4.

[get louder at lambeau]

Even if they knew what was in Star Caps (they aren't the only ones, other players took it too), it still highly doubtful it had any effect on the field, or any negative effect health wise. So... it's all silly to begin with.

And Brian Cushing didn't benefit on the field from having hCG in his system either. Both butamide and hCG are illegal because they are related to steroid use. Butamide is a steroid masking agent.

[packerbacker1234]

Even if they knew what was in Star Caps (they aren't the only ones, other players took it too), it still highly doubtful it had any effect on the field, or any negative effect health wise. So... it's all silly to begin with.

And Brian Cushing didn't benefit on the field from having hCG in his system either. Both butamide and hCG are illegal because they are related to steroid use. Butamide is a steroid masking agent.

butamide itself isn't the PE. Steroid use is completely different. If star caps was used to hide steroid use... fine, but prove they used steroids first. Star Caps technically served a legit purpose for a NFL player to use that isn't Steroids related. If the players were not made aware it had a steroid masking agent, how would they know?

Cushing is a different story. Steroids don't make you stronger, they just allow you to workout longer, which gives you the unatural ability to build up the muscles faster than what is normally humanly possible.

That, and they shrink your penis.

:P

I hope those muscles are worth it Cushing.

[sharpe1027]

butamide itself isn't the PE. Steroid use is completely different. If star caps was used to hide steroid use... fine, but prove they used steroids first. Star Caps technically served a legit purpose for a NFL player to use that isn't Steroids related. If the players were not made aware it had a steroid masking agent, how would they know?


Prove they didn't take steroids and mask it with butamide. Prove they actually took starcaps and didn't just claim it after-the-fact. Prove they didn't know about the butamine in star caps before hand and took it anyway so they'd have an excuse if they go caught.

The point being you can't, which is why the NFL has a strict liability policy. Nobody would ever get suspended otherwise.

[sharpe1027]

Steroids don't make you stronger, they just allow you to workout longer, which gives you the unatural ability to build up the muscles faster than what is normally humanly possible.


The Internet says that isn't true, but I'm no doctor.

http://www.ehow.com/how-does_4911141_work-body-promote-muscle-growth.html

How Steroids Work
Throughout the body are cells, ready to absorb anything that comes into the body through an extraneous source. These are called receptors, and they are the reason why drugs work when we use them. When steroids are introduced into the body, the cell receptors accept them, and in turn instruct the body on what to do next. Because of the influx of extra testosterone, the cell receptors tell the body to start building new proteins. While the body will do this naturally based on exercise and food consumption, steroids send the process into overdrive. More proteins create bigger muscles, with added endurance and speed, as well as strength.

[get louder at lambeau]

butamide itself isn't the PE. Steroid use is completely different. If star caps was used to hide steroid use... fine, but prove they used steroids first. Star Caps technically served a legit purpose for a NFL player to use that isn't Steroids related. If the players were not made aware it had a steroid masking agent, how would they know?


Prove they didn't take steroids and mask it with butamide. Prove they actually took starcaps and didn't just claim it after-the-fact. Prove they didn't know about the butamine in star caps before hand and took it anyway so they'd have an excuse if they go caught.

The point being you can't, which is why the NFL has a strict liability policy. Nobody would ever get suspended otherwise.

Yep. You're rewriting the rules, packerbacker. Just like they don't have to "prove" Cushing used steroids, they don't have to "prove" the Williams' bros did. The NFL can and did suspend them. The only issue at this point is whether MN state law was violated, not whether the Williams' boys violated the substance abuse policy or not. They did.

[Rastak]

Did you read what I posted on the ruling? Have you followed the case? The NFL caught 8 guys a few years ago and did NOTHING. Not one was suspended. The judge referred to that in his ruling. It was also mentioned point blank in the federal ruling. The rules are applied arbitrarily already.

So they aren't allowed to enforce a drug policy because they let some guys go in the past? Why don't you try that argument if you ever get pulled over for speeding..."I'm sorry officer, but the PD let 8 people off with only warnings last year so you can't write me at ticket." I bet that doesn't get you very far. :lol:

Baseball had many of their best players on steroids a few years ago and did almost nothing to enforce the steroid policy. I suppose that means that their decision to start enforcing the drug policy more forcefully lately might also be considered arbitrary. That doesn't mean it is the wrong thing to do.


They let the first 8 skate because the drug wasn't on the label. The right thing to do would be to COMMUNICATE that 8 unamed players were found with this drug. Here's the product, don't take it, going forward we will start suspending people despite the fact we violated our own policy by not suspending the first 8. They should have called the FDA also but they apparently could care less about the public.

Is that so damn hard? Speeding tickets and union/management labor contracts don't relate whatsoever. If you were at work and watched 8 fellow employees make a personal phone call in front of management then you did and they grabbed you and said "you're fired" I'm sure you'd laugh it off while you cleaned out your McDonald's locker. (j/k!)

I highly doubt the spirit of the drug policy was this. It's to keep a level playing field so players that take PEDs don't force everyone to do it to stay competitive because they are dangerous. When you bargin these things good faith is to be expected on both sides.

[get louder at lambeau]

Did you read what I posted on the ruling? Have you followed the case? The NFL caught 8 guys a few years ago and did NOTHING. Not one was suspended. The judge referred to that in his ruling. It was also mentioned point blank in the federal ruling. The rules are applied arbitrarily already.

So they aren't allowed to enforce a drug policy because they let some guys go in the past? Why don't you try that argument if you ever get pulled over for speeding..."I'm sorry officer, but the PD let 8 people off with only warnings last year so you can't write me at ticket." I bet that doesn't get you very far. :lol:

Baseball had many of their best players on steroids a few years ago and did almost nothing to enforce the steroid policy. I suppose that means that their decision to start enforcing the drug policy more forcefully lately might also be considered arbitrary. That doesn't mean it is the wrong thing to do.


They let the first 8 skate because the drug wasn't on the label. The right thing to do would be to COMMUNICATE that 8 unamed players were found with this drug. Here's the product, don't take it, going forward we will start suspending people despite the fact we violated our own policy by not suspending the first 8. They should have called the FDA also but they apparently could care less about the public.

That would have been the ideal response.

From what I've read/heard about it, I believe the NFL instead let the first batch of players off, then sent out a letter reminding players that they are responsible for what is in their bodies, that they strongly recommend players to use only NFL approved supplements, and that there will be zero tolerance for having banned substances in your system. Not quite as ideal of a response, but not quite as sneaky and underhanded as many MN fans paint it to be.

[sharpe1027]

They let the first 8 skate because the drug wasn't on the label. The right thing to do would be to COMMUNICATE that 8 unamed players were found with this drug. Here's the product, don't take it, going forward we will start suspending people despite the fact we violated our own policy by not suspending the first 8. They should have called the FDA also but they apparently could care less about the public.

Is that so damn hard? Speeding tickets and union/management labor contracts don't relate whatsoever. If you were at work and watched 8 fellow employees make a personal phone call in front of management then you did and they grabbed you and said "you're fired" I'm sure you'd laugh it off while you cleaned out your McDonald's locker. (j/k!)

I highly doubt the spirit of the drug policy was this. It's to keep a level playing field so players that take PEDs don't force everyone to do it to stay competitive because they are dangerous. When you bargin these things good faith is to be expected on both sides.

What if the personal phone calls were made several years ago, the 8 fellow employees were given a warning and then a general warning was issued to everyone at the company about not using company things for personal use? Wouldn't you be an idiot for still using the phone?

I'm not saying the NFL was perfect, far from it. But they should be able to enforce the policy even if they let 8 people off with a warning several years ago. Much like a speeding ticket or your McDonald's example.

[cheesner]

The NFL needs to take a different process with Minnesota players, and maybe those from other states. They need to say, okay, its not a legal issue its a game time rule. It is a penalty for a player to be enhancing their play pharmacutically (or trying to cover it up) for 4 games after the infraction has been detected. 5 yards and loss of down or (on defense) 5 yards and down over.

Therefore, every play that either Williams participates in the other team gets a free 5 yards. The Vikes would of course have to bench the players anyway. This of course doesn't cost the player $, but at least it is punitive to the team.

I don't think this violates the law. They can still play, just it is just a penalty.

[sharpe1027]

The NFL needs to take a different process with Minnesota players, and maybe those from other states. They need to say, okay, its not a legal issue its a game time rule. It is a penalty for a player to be enhancing their play pharmacutically (or trying to cover it up) for 4 games after the infraction has been detected. 5 yards and loss of down or (on defense) 5 yards and down over.

Therefore, every play that either Williams participates in the other team gets a free 5 yards. The Vikes would of course have to bench the players anyway. This of course doesn't cost the player $, but at least it is punitive to the team.

I don't think this violates the law. They can still play, just it is just a penalty.

I think the articles said that even though the NFL broke the law, the suspensions could still be enforced. Whatever the penalty was, it would probably be the same issue if was enforced based upon the NFL's illegal activity.

[packerbacker1234]

Steroids don't make you stronger, they just allow you to workout longer, which gives you the unatural ability to build up the muscles faster than what is normally humanly possible.


The Internet says that isn't true, but I'm no doctor.

http://www.ehow.com/how-does_4911141_work-body-promote-muscle-growth.html

How Steroids Work
Throughout the body are cells, ready to absorb anything that comes into the body through an extraneous source. These are called receptors, and they are the reason why drugs work when we use them. When steroids are introduced into the body, the cell receptors accept them, and in turn instruct the body on what to do next. Because of the influx of extra testosterone, the cell receptors tell the body to start building new proteins. While the body will do this naturally based on exercise and food consumption, steroids send the process into overdrive. More proteins create bigger muscles, with added endurance and speed, as well as strength.


http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071124150332AAoHWF3

Guy provided a lot of solid sources. You can take all the steroids you want, but they still account (on their own) as a very small percentage of muscle building if you just sat on your ass and pumped your body full of them. The science says you still need to maintain the proper body building diet, and workout like a mother fucker. Steroids helps in both those processes, but on it's own it not that much affect.

[sharpe1027]

Steroids don't make you stronger, they just allow you to workout longer, which gives you the unatural ability to build up the muscles faster than what is normally humanly possible.


The Internet says that isn't true, but I'm no doctor.

http://www.ehow.com/how-does_4911141_work-body-promote-muscle-growth.html

How Steroids Work
Throughout the body are cells, ready to absorb anything that comes into the body through an extraneous source. These are called receptors, and they are the reason why drugs work when we use them. When steroids are introduced into the body, the cell receptors accept them, and in turn instruct the body on what to do next. Because of the influx of extra testosterone, the cell receptors tell the body to start building new proteins. While the body will do this naturally based on exercise and food consumption, steroids send the process into overdrive. More proteins create bigger muscles, with added endurance and speed, as well as strength.


http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071124150332AAoHWF3

Guy provided a lot of solid sources. You can take all the steroids you want, but they still account (on their own) as a very small percentage of muscle building if you just sat on your ass and pumped your body full of them. The science says you still need to maintain the proper body building diet, and workout like a mother fucker. Steroids helps in both those processes, but on it's own it not that much affect.

Haha, nobody said you could sit on your ass and magically grow muscle. Two identical twins workout the same amount and have the same diet, one takes steroids and the other does not. The steroid user will build more muscle. It's not "just allowing them to workout longer."

http://www.thepumpingstation.com/steroids.html
Anabolic steroids work by stimulating the anabolic effect discussed earlier by binding or plugging into protein receptors in or on the cells that help create new proteins in the cells. This increased biological activity is called an increase in Ribonucleic Acid Activity (RNA Activity). The construction of new proteins helps increase muscle size and strength. Remember, this normally happens in the body. The steroids stimulate or increase this biological process by binding to the receptor sites on the protein cells.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10710012
Twenty one male weight training subjects were randomly assigned in a double blind method to either a 3.5 mg(-1) x kg(-1) TE (n=11) or placebo (n=10) weight training group. The subjects were monitored during a 12 week administration phase and a subsequent 12 week follow up phase. Subjects were tested on a number of strength and size measurements, whilst having their health monitored. The results from the study revealed that the testosterone/weight training group improved significantly (p<0.05) more than the placebo/weight training group during and immediately after the administration phase on a 1 repetition maximum bench press

I could go on. Wikipedia has a ton of studies that say there are significant gains in muscle mass resulting from steroid use.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anabolic_steroids

[packrulz]

Ruling in suspensions case could clear Williamses to play in 2010

Associated Press
MINNEAPOLIS -- The Minnesota Court of Appeals has rejected the NFL's request to expedite its handling of the case of Vikings defensive tackles Kevin Williams and Pat Williams, which means they might play the entire upcoming season.

The players are fighting a closely watched legal battle that so far has blocked the NFL from suspending them for four games apiece for testing positive for a banned diuretic in 2008.

Favre's motivation to return?
Brett Favre hasn't decided whether he'll come back to the Vikings, but he'd "love to beat the Saints" as payback for last season's NFC Championship Game defeat, he said. More ...
The Williamses, who aren't related, were in training camp when they took a weight-loss supplement called StarCaps, which contained the diuretic bumetanide but didn't list it on the label. The NFL bans bumetanide because it can mask the presence of steroids, though it never accused the two players of taking steroids.

In its order, obtained Thursday but dated Tuesday, the appeals court said the NFL hasn't demonstrated that the case should receive higher priority than others. It said the case doesn't involve issues of statewide importance, and there has been no showing that either side will suffer financial hardship while the appeal is pending.

Under court rules, it could be mid- to late August before both sides have filed their briefs. Then it typically would take another six to eight months for the appeals court to hold oral arguments. The court then would have up to 90 days to issue its decision. All of that would push the ruling well into next year.

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said the league might ask the appeals court to lift a trial judge's order blocking the suspensions.

"The court noted that the NFL has the option to seek review sooner by filing a motion to vacate the trial court's ruling blocking the suspensions," Aiello said in an e-mail. "We are studying the decision and will decide whether to pursue that option."

The Williamses' attorney, Peter Ginsberg, expressed confidence that the players will prevail, saying the courts have consistently found that the NFL violated their rights.


"We are confident that, no matter how many appeals the NFL files and no matter how much litigation the NFL pursues, the results will not change," Ginsberg said in an e-mail.

The case already has taken a complicated journey through the Minnesota and federal courts. At issue for the appeals court will be whether Hennepin County District Judge Gary Larson erred when he ruled against the Williamses in April.

Larson ruled that while the NFL broke state law when it failed to notify the players of their drug test results within the mandated three days, the league still could suspend them anyway because neither was harmed by the notification delay. Larson also stayed his ruling pending their appeal and said they were likely to succeed.

The NFL, meanwhile, has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review a federal appeals court decision that went against the league on other legal issues in the case. The high court hasn't yet said whether it will hear that appeal. The NFL, backed by other major league sports, contends that its collective bargaining agreement with the players' union and the contract's drug testing language should trump state law.

The Williamses already have avoided suspensions for a year and a half, dating to the initial announcement by the league in December 2008. They were spared by the courts for the end of the regular season and the playoffs that year, plus the 2009-10 season as the Vikings reached the NFC title game.

Pat Williams is in the final year of his contract, and he will turn 38 in October. It's possible that he will retire before any suspension could begin.

Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press