NFL Suspends 6 for Starcaps

[Rastak]

How about this analogy.

You work under a union agreement. Under said agreement (CBA) you agreed to avoid a rather extensive list of drugs (steroids and masking agents). In this "agreement" you "agreed" that taking drugs from the "trusted list" was OK and no harm would ever come your way. If you decided to stray from said "list" you would be doing so at your own risk as some companies are not as trust worthy as others.

Then, after this agreement these players went out and strayed from the list (right into a clearly spelled out area called "your own f'in risk". Now this is a big suprise to everyone, but this drug that was not on the trusted list is, well, not trust worthy. The NFL followed through by doing exacly what the agreement stated if such an occurance would arise and now that's some how someone elses fault.

Not only is this ludicrous and a pathetic show of "taking zero repsonsiblity for one's own actions", but it's also a patent offense to a very clear rule. A rule, that in it's very verbage, defined this exact circumstance.

This will not get overturned. This is mearly a delaying of the inevitable.

JH, I heard the reason Grady jackson isn't suspended. He has not had his appeal heard.


But riddle me this JH, why was the first Starcaps player in 2006 not suspended and do you find this consistent with their policy?

[KYPack]

KY, I ain't at all saying the players will winat all, merely that it's out of the NFL's hands now. The NFL will not decide this particular case.

I guess there's a hearing tomorrow at 11:30 EST and the issue of weather the players stay suspended as the case is heard or not should be finalized.


If you haven't noticed, I'm still a little on the fence right now on this.

I'm with ya.

My other post was to state that local courts (acting as politicians really) often stick their noses into these cases to look good to the populace.

The NFL has already screwed up by allowing the NFLPA to get this thing in front of the Fed judge.

As it turns out, Judge Paul Magnuson will take up on Friday not only the request for preliminary relief made by the NFLPA in its action on behalf of the five players who took StarCaps not knowing the product contained a banned substance, but also the pending case filed by Vikings defensive tackles Pat and Kevin Williams.

At 11:30 a.m. EST on Friday, Judge Magnuson will address the actions, and he presumably will issue a ruling on whether the suspensions will be blocked for the Week Fourteen games involving the Vikings and the New Orleans Saints, who have two players (Deuce McAllister and Will Smith) affected by the ruling. (Saints defensive end Charles Grant also was suspended, but he is on injured reserve and would be unavailable even if not suspended.)

The NFLPA action reportedly raises theories similar to those alleged by Pat and Kevin Williams. The gist of the actions is that the suspensions should be blocked because the NFL knew that StarCaps contained Bumetanide, a prescription drug, but did not warn the players about this fact.

I predict the Federal court will punt this case & the league will wind up with making a decision (mebbe a compromise), but I could be wrong.

One way or the other, I think Roger Goodell is in deep yogurt. He has allowed this thing to get out of his (the league's control). The owners hate that shit and will look for a new steward that can keep things more well in check.

[TennesseePackerBacker]

No way the owners get rid of Goddell for this, he has handled every other situation pretty well. I just don't see this getting overturned, and if they do stay the suspension for next weeks game, there is no certainty the players wont be suspended for the final 3 weeks and the first playoff game.

Any playoff team would destroy the Queens without the Williams wall. IMO the Vike's should just sit them now.

[Rastak]

One way or the other, I think Roger Goodell is in deep yogurt. He has allowed this thing to get out of his (the league's control). The owners hate that shit and will look for a new steward that can keep things more well in check.

That's true, first off I bet the NFL wishes this never would have become public at all, since it's supposed to be confidential.


The details already leaked, if true, doesn't make the NFL look all that good. Despite JH's insistence that the policy is black and white, they may be forced to admit they've failed as judge, jury and executioner by allowing the first guy to walk and then have their representative admit under questioning that he was afraid of personal liability and therefore didn;t issue an explicit warning.


I would say there a good chance the judge will punt this case and the guys can take their medicine starting right now. The only chance I see for the players is if the judge sees that the NFL is arbitrary in it's dealings and did not act in good faith in which case this could be overturned or that part of the CBA struck down.

[Rastak]

No way the owners get rid of Goddell for this, he has handled every other situation pretty well. I just don't see this getting overturned, and if they do stay the suspension for next weeks game, there is no certainty the players wont be suspended for the final 3 weeks and the first playoff game.

Any playoff team would destroy the Queens without the Williams wall. IMO the Vike's should just sit them now.

I'm not sure they can just sit them now, a judge has ruled for the moment the NFL can't suspend them. I'm not sure this would count even if they sat them because they will be paid Sunday.

Let's put it this way, if the judge tomorrow grants them a more permanent stay, it's likely it would last for the balance of the litigation which would likely be well after the playoffs. If not, they will miss the last four games.

[denverYooper]

As it turns out, Judge Paul Magnuson will take up on Friday not only the request for preliminary relief made by the NFLPA in its action on behalf of the five players who took StarCaps not knowing the product contained a banned substance, but also the pending case filed by Vikings defensive tackles Pat and Kevin Williams.

Magnuson eh? There's a fine Scandinavian name. His lineage was probably one of the original vikings who sailed their longships to the shores of Newfoundland. Looks like this one's in the in the can.

[sharpe1027]

JH, I heard the reason Grady jackson isn't suspended. He has not had his appeal heard.

But riddle me this JH, why was the first Starcaps player in 2006 not suspended and do you find this consistent with their policy?

Makes sense on Grady, they just haven't heard his appeal...lol.

As to your second point, the first player took Starcaps before the NFL issued the warning and probably called into the NFL to get the go-ahead. I'm sure NFL *could* have suspended the first player too...but since they had said it was O.K. then, but since warned players not to use Home Grown, I think there is a big difference between the situations.

[pbmax]

1) In 2004-2005 3 players called the NFL hotline and were told Starcaps contained no banned substances.

2) In 2006 a player tested positive for the banned drug and claimed he had only been taking Starcaps.

A Saints player was recently quoted as saying the hotline just read the list of ingredients off the bottle and checked them on the list of banned substances. Meaning, no new information could be gleaned from the Hotline, just confirmation. This seems consistent with the current portions of the policy that are online now.

If #1 happened exactly that way, I wonder if there was a time before this that the Hotline tried to be more proactive?

But I am still curious why they tested the product, and if such testing was a mistake in retrospect (or in fact)?

But I am even more interested in knowing how the banned companies list was put together.

The NFL might lose this round if the judge finds they have acted arbitrarily. But I think the larger trouble could be if the NFL is doing independent testing to develop the banned companies list and is not sharing that info with the players either. Then they would not just be acting arbitrarily, but they would be in violation of the intent of the Steroid and Drug Policy as signed by the League and players.

Only then, would the whole enchilada be in jeopardy. And by enchilada I mean the Drug Policy, not the CBA.

[sharpe1027]

But I think the larger trouble could be if the NFL is doing independent testing to develop the banned companies list and is not sharing that info with the players either. Then they would not just be acting arbitrarily, but they would be in violation of the intent of the Steroid and Drug Policy as signed by the League and players.

Only then, would the whole enchilada be in jeopardy. And by enchilada I mean the Drug Policy, not the CBA.

Interesting, I don't think there is any data to back that up yet. All we know is that they knew of Starcaps and warned the players against similiar types of supplements. There would have to be some new developments before the NFL gets into any trouble. Of course, that might just happen the legal battle....

[Rastak]

But I think the larger trouble could be if the NFL is doing independent testing to develop the banned companies list and is not sharing that info with the players either. Then they would not just be acting arbitrarily, but they would be in violation of the intent of the Steroid and Drug Policy as signed by the League and players.

Only then, would the whole enchilada be in jeopardy. And by enchilada I mean the Drug Policy, not the CBA.

Interesting, I don't think there is any data to back that up yet. All we know is that they knew of Starcaps and warned the players against similiar types of supplements. There would have to be some new developments before the NFL gets into any trouble. Of course, that might just happen the legal battle....

Per what I heard on NFL radio the league took samples to their lab and found the drug after a player claimed that's all he was taking.

If the policy was consistently enforced it wouldn't matter since Starcaps wasn't part of the line of supplements they get a kickback on....I mean that is approved.

[RashanGary]

I would say there a good chance the judge will punt this case and the guys can take their medicine starting right now. The only chance I see for the players is if the judge sees that the NFL is arbitrary in it's dealings and did not act in good faith in which case this could be overturned or that part of the CBA struck down.

This is very possible.

[sharpe1027]

Per what I heard on NFL radio the league took samples to their lab and found the drug after a player claimed that's all he was taking.

If the policy was consistently enforced it wouldn't matter since Starcaps wasn't part of the line of supplements they get a kickback on....I mean that is approved.

Well, if by consistent, you mean suspensions without regard for any of the circumstances of the case, then yes. If by consistent, you mean the same facts and the same results, then no. The facts were different in the cases.

Don't you think there is a difference when:

- one player was told the supplement was OK by the NFL and

- when other players were specifically warned about a supplier and a type of supplement and specifically told to only take the supplement at their own risk?

I'm not saying that they couldn't have, or even shouldn't have, suspended the first player, but it seems a logical and reasonable distinction to me...

[KYPack]

No way the owners get rid of Goddell for this, he has handled every other situation pretty well. I just don't see this getting overturned, and if they do stay the suspension for next weeks game, there is no certainty the players wont be suspended for the final 3 weeks and the first playoff game.

Any playoff team would destroy the Queens without the Williams wall. IMO the Vike's should just sit them now.

I think there is a real possibility that Goodell may catch a lot of hell for his actions in this case. He's handled it well? NOT REALLY.

A federal judge is now handling the case. No way Tagliabue or Rozelle would have allowed this issue to spin off and be decided by an independent entity. What if the judge makes a ruling that allows further legal action that overturns the CBA? That is the kind of exposure this case subjects the NFL to. I don't think that will happen, but under Goodell's watch that is the situation.

I'm sure there are owners very nervous about Goodell's management of the issue and the exposure the league has in this situation. I don't think he'll be canned, either. But he is now batting with a couple strikes on him. If more issues like this crop up and he bungles them, the owners will find a new man to run their league.

[Rastak]

Per what I heard on NFL radio the league took samples to their lab and found the drug after a player claimed that's all he was taking.

If the policy was consistently enforced it wouldn't matter since Starcaps wasn't part of the line of supplements they get a kickback on....I mean that is approved.

Well, if by consistent, you mean suspensions without regard for any of the circumstances of the case, then yes. If by consistent, you mean the same facts and the same results, then no. The facts were different in the cases.

Don't you think there is a difference when:

- one player was told the supplement was OK by the NFL and

- when other players were specifically warned about a supplier and a type of supplement and specifically told to only take the supplement at their own risk?

I'm not saying that they couldn't have, or even shouldn't have, suspended the first player, but it seems a logical and reasonable distinction to me...

I read the section that JH keeps pounding on which states any violation is a mandatory 4 game suspension and players are 100% liable.


JH is right in that the policy leaves no wiggle room, now that I have read for myself the relevent section. That means the NFL CAN'T reverse it unless there was an error in testing. If they let the first guy go then I would say they are acting in an arbitrary and inconsistent manner.

[denverYooper]

Per what I heard on NFL radio the league took samples to their lab and found the drug after a player claimed that's all he was taking.

If the policy was consistently enforced it wouldn't matter since Starcaps wasn't part of the line of supplements they get a kickback on....I mean that is approved.

Well, if by consistent, you mean suspensions without regard for any of the circumstances of the case, then yes. If by consistent, you mean the same facts and the same results, then no. The facts were different in the cases.

Don't you think there is a difference when:

- one player was told the supplement was OK by the NFL and

- when other players were specifically warned about a supplier and a type of supplement and specifically told to only take the supplement at their own risk?

I'm not saying that they couldn't have, or even shouldn't have, suspended the first player, but it seems a logical and reasonable distinction to me...

I read the section that JH keeps pounding on which states any violation is a mandatory 4 game suspension and players are 100% liable.


JH is right in that the policy leaves no wiggle room, now that I have read for myself the relevent section. That means the NFL CAN'T reverse it unless there was an error in testing. If they let the first guy go then I would say they are acting in an arbitrary and inconsistent manner.

I understand your frustration Ras. They should have suspended everyone involved. No question. It's really frustrating that 1 guy was not suspended (right now).

My primary sport is swimming, and has the same "responsible for what you put in your body policy". It has been consistently enforced, as long as I can remember. It doesn't matter if it's doctor prescribed or not, if it's banned and in your UA, you're suspended. There are no exceptions. Or if there are, I don't know about them.

My frustration with the NFL case has been that people think anyone should be let off for ignoring the "responsibility for what you take" policy and be able to place the blame on the governing body of the sport. So my take has been annoyance regarding their trying to get out of being punished.

However, I have been foolishly ignoring the exception made for Grady Jackson on the grounds that he has some other excuse. He should be suspended too. Not only would the consistency of enforcement send a better message, it is fair and I have a feeling that the other players would have been more likely to just take the punishment.