Star-Caps and Player suspensions in 2008 (1 Viewer)

[Breesisdaman]

A number of players have tested positive for diaretics due to a product used as a weight loss supplement Known as Star-Caps

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/10/28/...s-manufacturer/

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/...iD3aPc:_Yyc:aUU

http://www.twincities.com/ci_11035766?source=most_viewed

http://gnb.scout.com/a.z?s=61&p=2&c=813826

and finally

http://www.thenewsstar.com/article/2008112...006/1006/SPORTS

The argument

For suspension: NFL has a zero tolerance policy that is clearly communicated to the players. Players received a memo stating that they should watch everything they take, even if the NFL has approved it in the past. Players know that they are responsible for what they put into their bodies and that they will be held accountable if something is on the banned list.

Against supension: I will use the case of one of the many players- Deuce McAllister. Deuce cleared Starcaps four years ago with the NFL. The banned substance was later added to the product without putting it on the label. So even if he watched what he took by reading the label, he would not have any warning that the ingredients had changed.

The NFL knew two years ago that Starcaps had added a banned substance, and yet they refused to inform the players. This includes players that had previously been told that Starcaps was okay.

Deuce is appealing based on this and I think he has a very strong case both against the NFL and Star-caps.

The fact that the NFL knew that a substance they had approved was now banned and failing to inform players of the new information just clinches it for me. How can you tell someone that what they are doing is allowed under the rules, then determine that it's not, and NOT go back and tell them that it's no longer okay?

This means the league knew that players were taking Starcaps and just sat there and let them keep taking it after the league discovered that taking it was going to result in suspensions. A memo saying, "Oh, by the way, even if we told you something was okay, you still have to watch it," just doesn't cut it. From that, the players have to guess that the league has secretly put something on the banned list and the players get to guess whether it's what they're taking. So, what do they do? They check the label. Which we know doesn't tell them anything.

Furthermore the whole purpose of the banned substance policy is to clean up the sport and make sure that there is a high level of integrity -- NOT, let see who or how many we can catch therefore, everyone on every level should be doing EVERYTHING in their power to help curb the problem of banned substances. It is quickly becoming apparent that the players in this situation did what was in their power to avoid this situation and that the NFL did not. The NFL is at fault for not doing everything they can to protect the integrity of the game by not disclosing needed information. They are at fault for forgetting what the real reason for the policy is -- Protecting the integrity of the game and making sure that it is a clean game. I think they are in real trouble in these cases and they could see legal action. It is criminal in my mind that they can get up on their high horses accusing players knowing that they had a part in it.

If lawsuits come of this not only toward the maker Star-Caps but also toward the NFL for not sharing its knowledge of the banned substance in the product. I certainly see the justification based on what I have researched and read and I think a Judge would also. The Travis Henry situation last year was just a warm up compared to how big this could blow up.

Any further thoughts?

 

[Anon]

My opinion, is some kind of compromise or half measure. I don't see the league letting it go unpunished, but I don't believe they will all serve 4 game suspensions. Best case would be 4 game supensions, commuted. Some kind of drug awareness program, probation, and the threat that another positive test could end in the 1 year suspension. I also think the league should start publishing to the players the results of any suppliments submitted to them for testing, as well as anything they test by themselves. Whats wrong with informing the players about suppliments that are safe or suspect?

Either way, I would just like it to be resolved.

 

[Breesisdaman]

Also as a fan of a certain NFL team who already has had 13 starters out with injury and thats not a typo, you are pretty much dooming the franchise for the rest of the season by suspending both Starting DE's and the only power back on the roster and an offensive lineman all at the same time. If they are guilty of cheating so be it but for nonsense like this it is cheating the fan! I paid for season tickets I feel that I am entitled to seeing my team play and not a bunch of backups. Its not preseason and its not funny. I am sure folks in Minnesota feel the same way about their D Lineman. The NFL needs to get its act together.

 

[FFdork]

I think the NFL screwed up big time on this one. I understand that they didn't want Starcaps to become the excuse for every player busted for a masking agent, but you also have to think about the health of players in terms of choosing to NOT inform them when you know a product contains something not written on the label.

I guess when I take it all in, I kind of think this was a calculated move by the NFL. Let the word get out there about it, drag out the due process, give the players involved a slap on the hand, and now that every player is aware of Starcaps declare that it will not be an acceptable excuse for any positive tests going forward.

 

[Anon]

No link, Sunday morning ESPN, Mort mentioned that the Vikings owner attended the hearings. He also speculated that the decision would be released a week from Tuesday (That would be December 2nd).

 

[Breesisdaman]

http://ca.reuters.com/article/sportsNews/i...E4B37HY20081204

As predicted

By Simon Evans

MIAMI (Reuters) - The NFL Players Association (NFLPA) has filed a lawsuit challenging the suspensions of three New Orleans Saints and two Minnesota Vikings players for breach of the league's steroids policy.

Charles Grant, Will Smith and Deuce McAllister of New Orleans and Kevin Williams and Pat Williams of Minnesota were all suspended by the league on Tuesday for four games.

The lawsuit, filed with the Federal District Court in Minneapolis, asks for an "immediate injunction" to allow the players to take part in this weekend's games.

Bryan Pittman of Houston was also suspended but his case was not mentioned in the statement by the Players Association.

The players were suspended after the NFL ruled they had taken banned substances which could act as masking agents for steroids.

The NFL statement referred to a weight loss product called StarCaps and the league said it had warned teams in 2006 that Balanced Health Products, the makers of StarCaps, had been added to the list of prohibited dietary supplement companies.

However, the NFLPA's lawsuit claims the league failed to notify the players that StarCaps contained a substance that was prohibited by the league's anti-doping policy.

Richard Berthelsen, acting executive director and general counsel of the NFLPA, stated: "We are taking these steps today in hopes of keeping these players on the playing field.

"We strongly believe that the doctors and the NFL should have told us and the players what they knew about StarCaps, but for some unknown reason they failed to meet that duty," added the statement.

The suspensions are a big blow for the Minnesota Vikings, who lead the NFC North. Kevin and Pat Williams, who are not related, are the heart of the team's defense as starting defensive tackles.

The Vikings lead Chicago by a game with just four games remaining in the regular season.

(Editing by Ken Ferris)

© Thomson Reuters 2008 All rights reserved

This news could mean the players will be back with their teams as soon as this week if the NFLPA is successful in court

 

[SierraKiloBravo]

Where's it written that the NFL has a duty to inform the players of what products contain banned substances? They simply inform the players of the banned substances and that's that. Do they have to take the extra step to identify every product on the market (or otherwise) and then pass that information onto the players? Why can't their union do this? If the player wants to take a substance, why can't the player himself invest the resources to determine if the product contains a banned substance? If the NFL was somehow in league with the manufacturer to hide this information, then maybe there's something (although that has nothing to do with duty).

My opinion is that these clowns get paid an awful lot of money to play a kid's game and all they have to do is not introduce a discretionary substance into their bodies. Strict liability should be the standard here. You test positive, you get banned.

In turn, don't get me started on Matt Jones.

 

[Breesisdaman]

Where's it written that the NFL has a duty to inform the players of what products contain banned substances? They simply inform the players of the banned substances and that's that. Do they have to take the extra step to identify every product on the market (or otherwise) and then pass that information onto the players? Why can't their union do this? If the player wants to take a substance, why can't the player himself invest the resources to determine if the product contains a banned substance? If the NFL was somehow in league with the manufacturer to hide this information, then maybe there's something (although that has nothing to do with duty). My opinion is that these clowns get paid an awful lot of money to play a kid's game and all they have to do is not introduce a discretionary substance into their bodies. Strict liability should be the standard here. You test positive, you get banned. In turn, don't get me started on Matt Jones.

I explained my thought on this in my last paragraph in the opening post. Basically the League should have disclosed any information they received to the players regarding a new ingredient in the formula they knew the players were taking before the ingredient was added. If the NFL is serious about their drug policy this is the least they should do. I predict that the Players will win in court tomorrow and will be back on the field this weekend so I would keep an eye out.

 

[SierraKiloBravo]

Where's it written that the NFL has a duty to inform the players of what products contain banned substances? They simply inform the players of the banned substances and that's that. Do they have to take the extra step to identify every product on the market (or otherwise) and then pass that information onto the players? Why can't their union do this? If the player wants to take a substance, why can't the player himself invest the resources to determine if the product contains a banned substance? If the NFL was somehow in league with the manufacturer to hide this information, then maybe there's something (although that has nothing to do with duty).

My opinion is that these clowns get paid an awful lot of money to play a kid's game and all they have to do is not introduce a discretionary substance into their bodies. Strict liability should be the standard here. You test positive, you get banned.

In turn, don't get me started on Matt Jones.

I explained my thought on this in my last paragraph in the opening post. Basically the League should have disclosed any information they received to the players regarding a new ingredient in the formula they knew the players were taking before the ingredient was added. If the NFL is serious about their drug policy this is the least they should do. I predict that the Players will win in court tomorrow and will be back on the field this weekend so I would keep an eye out.

The question then is whether the NFL is obligated to do this. Saying "the NFL should do XYZ" and "the NFL has a duty to do XYZ" is two different things. If the information is publicly available to both the league and the player, then I question whether any duty exists in the first place. If anything, it seems like the organization established to benefit the players, the NFLPA, should be doing this.

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

If they previously told Deuce that it was OK to use, then of course they had an obligation to inform him that it was no longer OK.

It's ridiculous to think these players are chemists who can detect when an new unlisted substance is added to a supplement the NFL OK'd.

 

[Anon]

One other item of note, besides the Starcaps issue itself (who knew what & when and told whoever), the NFLPA legal documents are also claiming that the arbitrar (Jeffrey Pash) as Director of the NFL legal department "was directly involved in the wrongful NFL behavior at issue". So he "could not be a fair arbitrar in these unique circumstances in which his office was directly implicated".

 

[PatrickT]

I had heard on Sirius that the league had distributed information on star-caps being banned in 2006. It was distributed to agents, trainers and players and was available to all players via the NFLPA web site. I heard this as a quote from Tim Ryan reading off of an NFL document on Moving the Chains.

If that's the case, the players haven't a leg to stand on, by rule. I think it's silly, as most "zero tolerance" policies are, but rules is rules, as they say.

 

[Breesisdaman]

I had heard on Sirius that the league had distributed information on star-caps being banned in 2006. It was distributed to agents, trainers and players and was available to all players via the NFLPA web site. I heard this as a quote from Tim Ryan reading off of an NFL document on Moving the Chains.

If that's the case, the players haven't a leg to stand on, by rule. I think it's silly, as most "zero tolerance" policies are, but rules is rules, as they say.

In your own words "If" that is the case. The truth will be known soon enough.From the last link in the original post:

The lawyer representing McAllister, Grant and Smith said on Wednesday that the NFL's independent drug administrator acknowledged he did not inform NFL players that the diet pill StarCaps contained the banned substance Bumetanide.

 

[ourmanflint]

Where's it written that the NFL has a duty to inform the players of what products contain banned substances? They simply inform the players of the banned substances and that's that. Do they have to take the extra step to identify every product on the market (or otherwise) and then pass that information onto the players? Why can't their union do this? If the player wants to take a substance, why can't the player himself invest the resources to determine if the product contains a banned substance? If the NFL was somehow in league with the manufacturer to hide this information, then maybe there's something (although that has nothing to do with duty).

My opinion is that these clowns get paid an awful lot of money to play a kid's game and all they have to do is not introduce a discretionary substance into their bodies. Strict liability should be the standard here. You test positive, you get banned.

In turn, don't get me started on Matt Jones.

I explained my thought on this in my last paragraph in the opening post. Basically the League should have disclosed any information they received to the players regarding a new ingredient in the formula they knew the players were taking before the ingredient was added. If the NFL is serious about their drug policy this is the least they should do. I predict that the Players will win in court tomorrow and will be back on the field this weekend so I would keep an eye out.

The question then is whether the NFL is obligated to do this. Saying "the NFL should do XYZ" and "the NFL has a duty to do XYZ" is two different things. If the information is publicly available to both the league and the player, then I question whether any duty exists in the first place. If anything, it seems like the organization established to benefit the players, the NFLPA, should be doing this.

Isn't it in the NFL's best interest to inform the players? Why the hell wouldn't they? Those players don't just make themselves money, they make the NFL money as well. I don't see why they can't work together on this.I think the above posters are right. The fans lose on this. Those players were not trying to cheat. They were actually really trying to adhere to the policy. But the supplement company pulled a fast one on them and the NFL didn't have their back.

If you take the NFL's side on this, you simply aren't looking at the facts. Policy or no, NFLPA approved or no, this decision sucks. I actually have a lot to gain fantasy-wise but it really just isn't fair to the players here.

 

[ourmanflint]

I had heard on Sirius that the league had distributed information on star-caps being banned in 2006. It was distributed to agents, trainers and players and was available to all players via the NFLPA web site. I heard this as a quote from Tim Ryan reading off of an NFL document on Moving the Chains.

If that's the case, the players haven't a leg to stand on, by rule. I think it's silly, as most "zero tolerance" policies are, but rules is rules, as they say.

In your on words "If" that is the case. The truth will be known soon enough.From the last link in the original post:

The lawyer representing McAllister, Grant and Smith said on Wednesday that the NFL's independent drug administrator acknowledged he did not inform NFL players that the diet pill StarCaps contained the banned substance Bumetanide.

Yep. This is the big question. We will know soon. Lots of conflicting info on this.

 

[Chaka]

Also as a fan of a certain NFL team who already has had 13 starters out with injury and thats not a typo, you are pretty much dooming the franchise for the rest of the season by suspending both Starting DE's and the only power back on the roster and an offensive lineman all at the same time. If they are guilty of cheating so be it but for nonsense like this it is cheating the fan! I paid for season tickets I feel that I am entitled to seeing my team play and not a bunch of backups. Its not preseason and its not funny. I am sure folks in Minnesota feel the same way about their D Lineman. The NFL needs to get its act together.

One of those defensive ends is already on IR and the team has two running backs who are superior in talent to Deuce. Including one who is every bit as good of an inside runner as Deuce.This is not what is going to kill their season, not being able to close out games or win on the road or win consecutive games killed their season already.

 

[David Yudkin]

I don't see the players having much chance of avoiding the suspensions. HERE is a link to the latest update.

For those saying the league had an obligation to notify the players, they did in 2006:

NFL executive vice president Jeffrey Pash wrote that in 2006, the NFL sent written notice to the presidents, general managers and head trainers of all NFL teams, as well as to NFLPA executive Stacey Robinson, that the distributor of StarCaps, Balanced Health Products, had been added to the league's list of prohibited dietary supplement companies. He also wrote that Robinson, who oversees steroid policy for the union, had added the distributor to the list of banned companies on the union's Web site.

The players contend that the NFL did not disclose WHY StarCaps was added to the list and that it contained bumetanide and therefore needed to inform every individual player of that specific ingredient. Given that the league did inform the powers that be that it was added to the banned list, I can't see how the suspended players can wiggle out of this.

 

[two_dollars]

Starcaps was banned in 2006. End of story.

also from that article:

"The program and the collective bargaining agreement expressly bar precisely this kind of lawsuit," NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said in an e-mail to the AP. "All of the steroid program's rules and procedures are established in agreement with the players' union. In other words, the players have agreed to the rules and the procedures that they are now challenging. There is no merit to this lawsuit and we look forward to responding to the court."

 

[Breesisdaman]

Also as a fan of a certain NFL team who already has had 13 starters out with injury and thats not a typo, you are pretty much dooming the franchise for the rest of the season by suspending both Starting DE's and the only power back on the roster and an offensive lineman all at the same time. If they are guilty of cheating so be it but for nonsense like this it is cheating the fan! I paid for season tickets I feel that I am entitled to seeing my team play and not a bunch of backups. Its not preseason and its not funny. I am sure folks in Minnesota feel the same way about their D Lineman. The NFL needs to get its act together.

One of those defensive ends is already on IR and the team has two running backs who are superior in talent to Deuce. Including one who is every bit as good of an inside runner as Deuce.This is not what is going to kill their season, not being able to close out games or win on the road or win consecutive games killed their season already.

That and 14 on IR. You cant overlook that. Kevin Kaesvahern (Sp?) took them from 13 players to 14 on IR this past week. I dont think the Giants or Pats could even survive 14 players on IR but then again I could be wrong. (Thinking about Cassel and Hixon stepping up)

 

[Breesisdaman]

Starcaps was banned in 2006. End of story.also from that article:"The program and the collective bargaining agreement expressly bar precisely this kind of lawsuit," NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said in an e-mail to the AP. "All of the steroid program's rules and procedures are established in agreement with the players' union. In other words, the players have agreed to the rules and the procedures that they are now challenging. There is no merit to this lawsuit and we look forward to responding to the court."

I look forward to seeing if the Judge agrees with them

 

[Anon]

I am waiting for a New Orleans or Minneapolis district attorney to file criminal charges against the primary NFL guys (the Arbitrar, his assistant, and the Doctor) for endangering public safety. They had knowledge that a potenitally dangerous substance was present in Starcaps and they did not notify the authorities to get it immediately removed from Shelves.

I think that would be very entertaining.

 

[GroveDiesel]

I don't see the players having much chance of avoiding the suspensions. HERE is a link to the latest update.

For those saying the league had an obligation to notify the players, they did in 2006:

NFL executive vice president Jeffrey Pash wrote that in 2006, the NFL sent written notice to the presidents, general managers and head trainers of all NFL teams, as well as to NFLPA executive Stacey Robinson, that the distributor of StarCaps, Balanced Health Products, had been added to the league's list of prohibited dietary supplement companies. He also wrote that Robinson, who oversees steroid policy for the union, had added the distributor to the list of banned companies on the union's Web site.

The players contend that the NFL did not disclose WHY StarCaps was added to the list and that it contained bumetanide and therefore needed to inform every individual player of that specific ingredient. Given that the league did inform the powers that be that it was added to the banned list, I can't see how the suspended players can wiggle out of this.

It almost seems like this is more of a PR thing by the players than anything else. How can they possibly think that they have a legitimate case? The NFL informed teams and the NFLPA in 2006 that StarCaps was banned and that the distributor was added to the list of banned companies. That's something that they didn't even NEED to do under the policy as it is written. I think that it's possible that these players are just trying to prevent damage to their reputations more than anything. Even if they lose (as they should), everyone will believe that it was a "mistake" that they tested positive.

The ENTIRE reasons that the NFL created the partnership with EAS and has a list of APPROVED supplements is precisely because of what happened here. Supplement makers don't follow any regulations and ingredients end up in them that shouldn't be. With EAS, the NFL knows exactly what is going into each supplement so they know that it's safe and legal for the players. Any player taking ANYTHING outside of those supplements is putting themselves at risk. These guys all took a gamble (one that they should have known not to take anyway since their team and their union had been informed about the specific product) and they lost. End of story.

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

Where's it written that the NFL has a duty to inform the players of what products contain banned substances? They simply inform the players of the banned substances and that's that. Do they have to take the extra step to identify every product on the market (or otherwise) and then pass that information onto the players? Why can't their union do this? If the player wants to take a substance, why can't the player himself invest the resources to determine if the product contains a banned substance? If the NFL was somehow in league with the manufacturer to hide this information, then maybe there's something (although that has nothing to do with duty).

My opinion is that these clowns get paid an awful lot of money to play a kid's game and all they have to do is not introduce a discretionary substance into their bodies. Strict liability should be the standard here. You test positive, you get banned.

In turn, don't get me started on Matt Jones.

I had heard on Sirius that the league had distributed information on star-caps being banned in 2006. It was distributed to agents, trainers and players and was available to all players via the NFLPA web site. I heard this as a quote from Tim Ryan reading off of an NFL document on Moving the Chains.

If that's the case, the players haven't a leg to stand on, by rule. I think it's silly, as most "zero tolerance" policies are, but rules is rules, as they say.

'sI think this is pretty cut and dry. There's no subjectivity. It sucks for these guys, but the rules are the rules. When you start making exceptions integrity starts to crumble.

On a side note... These pills were proclaimed to not be performance enhancing drugs. In my opinion, they are. It's less dramatic than traditional steroids. However, losing weight for a guy like Pat Williams is no doubt enhancing his performance. Just a different look at it...

 

[GroveDiesel]

Where's it written that the NFL has a duty to inform the players of what products contain banned substances? They simply inform the players of the banned substances and that's that. Do they have to take the extra step to identify every product on the market (or otherwise) and then pass that information onto the players? Why can't their union do this? If the player wants to take a substance, why can't the player himself invest the resources to determine if the product contains a banned substance? If the NFL was somehow in league with the manufacturer to hide this information, then maybe there's something (although that has nothing to do with duty).

My opinion is that these clowns get paid an awful lot of money to play a kid's game and all they have to do is not introduce a discretionary substance into their bodies. Strict liability should be the standard here. You test positive, you get banned.

In turn, don't get me started on Matt Jones.

I had heard on Sirius that the league had distributed information on star-caps being banned in 2006. It was distributed to agents, trainers and players and was available to all players via the NFLPA web site. I heard this as a quote from Tim Ryan reading off of an NFL document on Moving the Chains.

If that's the case, the players haven't a leg to stand on, by rule. I think it's silly, as most "zero tolerance" policies are, but rules is rules, as they say.

'sI think this is pretty cut and dry. There's no subjectivity. It sucks for these guys, but the rules are the rules. When you start making exceptions integrity starts to crumble.

On a side note... These pills were proclaimed to not be performance enhancing drugs. In my opinion, they are. It's less dramatic than traditional steroids. However, losing weight for a guy like Pat Williams is no doubt enhancing his performance. Just a different look at it...

Well, it wasn't banned just because of the losing weight thing. A diuretic makes you have to pee more so it ends up dilluting your urine. So it works as a masking agent for steroids and other drugs.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Just because you agree to a contract does not mean that whatever is in that contract is law. Everything still has to be on the up and up.

The biggest question here is whether the NFL did its due diligence in reporting about this substance. If they did(which it looks like they did) then the suspensions will hold. If they did not, then they will be overturned.

Even though the CBA does not obligate them to go out and perform tests on substances, they DID. This product was tested by the NFL and they were 100% aware that it contained a potentially harmful substance.

They wouldnt be allowed to test a product, but then withhold the results because the CBA does not obligate them to test.

This is very similar to lead paint disclosures when selling your house. You are NOT obligated to test for lead. However if you do test for lead, and find out you have it, it is illegal to not disclose it. You cant just tell your realtor. You cant just tell their realtor. You actually have to give it to the new homeowners in writing.

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

Well, it wasn't banned just because of the losing weight thing. A diuretic makes you have to pee more so it ends up dilluting your urine. So it works as a masking agent for steroids and other drugs.

Oh, I'm aware of that. I'm just adding another thing to consider. Even if it didn't help lose weight. Heck if it was just a Vitamin C pill I think they should be suspended. The fact that a drug is a masking agent for something is just as bad as taking whatever it masks, in terms of culpability, in my mind.

 

[garyd]

I don't see the players having much chance of avoiding the suspensions. HERE is a link to the latest update.

For those saying the league had an obligation to notify the players, they did in 2006:

NFL executive vice president Jeffrey Pash wrote that in 2006, the NFL sent written notice to the presidents, general managers and head trainers of all NFL teams, as well as to NFLPA executive Stacey Robinson, that the distributor of StarCaps, Balanced Health Products, had been added to the league's list of prohibited dietary supplement companies. He also wrote that Robinson, who oversees steroid policy for the union, had added the distributor to the list of banned companies on the union's Web site.

The players contend that the NFL did not disclose WHY StarCaps was added to the list and that it contained bumetanide and therefore needed to inform every individual player of that specific ingredient. Given that the league did inform the powers that be that it was added to the banned list, I can't see how the suspended players can wiggle out of this.

The banned/not banned issue is NOT cut and dry....let's carefully re-read the quote from the NFL and see what it really says. It does not say the StarCaps the product is banned, it says (and twice I may add) that the company that makes StarCaps has been added to the list of prohibited/banned companies. The following is a quote from the lawyer hired by Kevin Williams:Renowed New York attorney Peter Ginsberg, who represented Kevin Williams in the appeal process, disputed the NFL's contention that StarCaps was added to the banned list of supplements.

"What the [NFL] did, in fact, was issue that notification for commercial purposes, telling players not to endorse the manufacturer of StarCaps," Ginsberg told ESPN. "There was absolutely no warning about a nondisclosed banned ingredient. [The notice] was purely for commercial reasons and without regard for the health, welfare and safety of the player. For Adolpho Birch or anyone associated with the NFL to suggest there was a specific warning [on StarCaps] is disingenuous and disappointing."

If this is indeed the case, and can be proven, I'd say that there is still plenty of wriggle room left here.

 

[Chaka]

Also as a fan of a certain NFL team who already has had 13 starters out with injury and thats not a typo, you are pretty much dooming the franchise for the rest of the season by suspending both Starting DE's and the only power back on the roster and an offensive lineman all at the same time. If they are guilty of cheating so be it but for nonsense like this it is cheating the fan! I paid for season tickets I feel that I am entitled to seeing my team play and not a bunch of backups. Its not preseason and its not funny. I am sure folks in Minnesota feel the same way about their D Lineman. The NFL needs to get its act together.

One of those defensive ends is already on IR and the team has two running backs who are superior in talent to Deuce. Including one who is every bit as good of an inside runner as Deuce.This is not what is going to kill their season, not being able to close out games or win on the road or win consecutive games killed their season already.

That and 14 on IR. You cant overlook that. Kevin Kaesvahern (Sp?) took them from 13 players to 14 on IR this past week. I dont think the Giants or Pats could even survive 14 players on IR but then again I could be wrong. (Thinking about Cassel and Hixon stepping up)

Injuries happen. It's not the leagues fault that New Orleans suffered more than most and it is not the leagues responsibility to go easy on players who violated the rules because their team has already had a tough season by way of injury.I would also argue that Minnesota is hurt far more by these suspensions than New Orleans. Do they deserve special treatment?

 

[big_donkey]

I hope to find out about Duece asap. Any idea when there is going to be a ruling on the suspensions? I need a rb for week 15-16 and will pick up Thomas if Deuce is gone. If not then I will pick up Hillis with less favorable matchups. TIA

 

[Chaka]

I hope to find out about Duece asap. Any idea when there is going to be a ruling on the suspensions? I need a rb for week 15-16 and will pick up Thomas if Deuce is gone. If not then I will pick up Hillis with less favorable matchups. TIA

Quit hesitating and pick up either of them. My opinion is Hillis is a better bet then Thomas. Reggie is a much bigger threat to vulture production than Selvin and Tater.

 

[David Yudkin]

I don't see the players having much chance of avoiding the suspensions. HERE is a link to the latest update.

For those saying the league had an obligation to notify the players, they did in 2006:

NFL executive vice president Jeffrey Pash wrote that in 2006, the NFL sent written notice to the presidents, general managers and head trainers of all NFL teams, as well as to NFLPA executive Stacey Robinson, that the distributor of StarCaps, Balanced Health Products, had been added to the league's list of prohibited dietary supplement companies. He also wrote that Robinson, who oversees steroid policy for the union, had added the distributor to the list of banned companies on the union's Web site.

The players contend that the NFL did not disclose WHY StarCaps was added to the list and that it contained bumetanide and therefore needed to inform every individual player of that specific ingredient. Given that the league did inform the powers that be that it was added to the banned list, I can't see how the suspended players can wiggle out of this.

The banned/not banned issue is NOT cut and dry....let's carefully re-read the quote from the NFL and see what it really says. It does not say the StarCaps the product is banned, it says (and twice I may add) that the company that makes StarCaps has been added to the list of prohibited/banned companies. The following is a quote from the lawyer hired by Kevin Williams:Renowed New York attorney Peter Ginsberg, who represented Kevin Williams in the appeal process, disputed the NFL's contention that StarCaps was added to the banned list of supplements.

"What the [NFL] did, in fact, was issue that notification for commercial purposes, telling players not to endorse the manufacturer of StarCaps," Ginsberg told ESPN. "There was absolutely no warning about a nondisclosed banned ingredient. [The notice] was purely for commercial reasons and without regard for the health, welfare and safety of the player. For Adolpho Birch or anyone associated with the NFL to suggest there was a specific warning [on StarCaps] is disingenuous and disappointing."

If this is indeed the case, and can be proven, I'd say that there is still plenty of wriggle room left here.

I'm still not buying it. If the NFL informed the powers that be (which it sounds like they did) that the companies and distributors were added to the banned companies list and they followed the guidelines set forth in the CBA (which they also seemed to have done), it doesn't sound like it matters beyond that what the NFL did.Remember, the NFL has made it very clear that the onus is on the players to clarify what is acceptable and not acceptable, not the NFL, for products that have not been approved. In this case, the manufacturers and distributors of those products were on the banned list (apparently the confusion lies that the EXACT product taken was not listed). One would think that if they saw the company that made what they were taking on the banned list that would prompt them BEFORE THEY TESTED POSITIVE to clarify whether what they were taking was banned/harmful and at the very least get it tested (which appears to be a process already outlined by the NFL and one that was not difficult to accomplish).

IMO, if the players have a gripe it's with the NFLPA for not better mentoring or informing them. I get that the foundation of their case is that they didn't know, but it's the NFLPA's job to inform them, not the NFL's. That's why they have a union, why their is a CBA, and why they agreed not to sue over these issues when they readified the CBA.

An entirely different issue is whether all the companies, products, and drugs on the list are justified or not, as I remember players having to take suspensions for tested positive for too much cold medication. But that's fodder for a different thread.

 

[ourmanflint]

I don't see the players having much chance of avoiding the suspensions. HERE is a link to the latest update.

For those saying the league had an obligation to notify the players, they did in 2006:

NFL executive vice president Jeffrey Pash wrote that in 2006, the NFL sent written notice to the presidents, general managers and head trainers of all NFL teams, as well as to NFLPA executive Stacey Robinson, that the distributor of StarCaps, Balanced Health Products, had been added to the league's list of prohibited dietary supplement companies. He also wrote that Robinson, who oversees steroid policy for the union, had added the distributor to the list of banned companies on the union's Web site.

The players contend that the NFL did not disclose WHY StarCaps was added to the list and that it contained bumetanide and therefore needed to inform every individual player of that specific ingredient. Given that the league did inform the powers that be that it was added to the banned list, I can't see how the suspended players can wiggle out of this.

The banned/not banned issue is NOT cut and dry....let's carefully re-read the quote from the NFL and see what it really says. It does not say the StarCaps the product is banned, it says (and twice I may add) that the company that makes StarCaps has been added to the list of prohibited/banned companies. The following is a quote from the lawyer hired by Kevin Williams:Renowed New York attorney Peter Ginsberg, who represented Kevin Williams in the appeal process, disputed the NFL's contention that StarCaps was added to the banned list of supplements.

"What the [NFL] did, in fact, was issue that notification for commercial purposes, telling players not to endorse the manufacturer of StarCaps," Ginsberg told ESPN. "There was absolutely no warning about a nondisclosed banned ingredient. [The notice] was purely for commercial reasons and without regard for the health, welfare and safety of the player. For Adolpho Birch or anyone associated with the NFL to suggest there was a specific warning [on StarCaps] is disingenuous and disappointing."

If this is indeed the case, and can be proven, I'd say that there is still plenty of wriggle room left here.

Sounds like the lawyer is spinning it to make his case look good.Is that what the banned lists are for? To keep players from endorsing products? I really don't know I am asking.

But from the NFL statements it sounded like the banned company lists were telling players not to use products from those companies because they may have banned substances.

Are there banned lists for different purposes?

 

[garyd]

I don't see the players having much chance of avoiding the suspensions. HERE is a link to the latest update.

For those saying the league had an obligation to notify the players, they did in 2006:

NFL executive vice president Jeffrey Pash wrote that in 2006, the NFL sent written notice to the presidents, general managers and head trainers of all NFL teams, as well as to NFLPA executive Stacey Robinson, that the distributor of StarCaps, Balanced Health Products, had been added to the league's list of prohibited dietary supplement companies. He also wrote that Robinson, who oversees steroid policy for the union, had added the distributor to the list of banned companies on the union's Web site.

The players contend that the NFL did not disclose WHY StarCaps was added to the list and that it contained bumetanide and therefore needed to inform every individual player of that specific ingredient. Given that the league did inform the powers that be that it was added to the banned list, I can't see how the suspended players can wiggle out of this.

The banned/not banned issue is NOT cut and dry....let's carefully re-read the quote from the NFL and see what it really says. It does not say the StarCaps the product is banned, it says (and twice I may add) that the company that makes StarCaps has been added to the list of prohibited/banned companies. The following is a quote from the lawyer hired by Kevin Williams:Renowed New York attorney Peter Ginsberg, who represented Kevin Williams in the appeal process, disputed the NFL's contention that StarCaps was added to the banned list of supplements.

"What the [NFL] did, in fact, was issue that notification for commercial purposes, telling players not to endorse the manufacturer of StarCaps," Ginsberg told ESPN. "There was absolutely no warning about a nondisclosed banned ingredient. [The notice] was purely for commercial reasons and without regard for the health, welfare and safety of the player. For Adolpho Birch or anyone associated with the NFL to suggest there was a specific warning [on StarCaps] is disingenuous and disappointing."

If this is indeed the case, and can be proven, I'd say that there is still plenty of wriggle room left here.

Sounds like the lawyer is spinning it to make his case look good.Is that what the banned lists are for? To keep players from endorsing products? I really don't know I am asking.

But from the NFL statements it sounded like the banned company lists were telling players not to use products from those companies because they may have banned substances.

Are there banned lists for different purposes?

Good questions, and I think that's why there is still wriggle room here because your responses illustrate the confusion. How many lists are there? How/why do you get on a list? Are there indeed companies on the list for reasons other than chemistry? You used the words "sounded like" and "may have" in describing the NFL statements...is that definitive enough to suspend somebody for 4 games?

 

[Dash]

I don't see the players having much chance of avoiding the suspensions. HERE is a link to the latest update.

For those saying the league had an obligation to notify the players, they did in 2006:

NFL executive vice president Jeffrey Pash wrote that in 2006, the NFL sent written notice to the presidents, general managers and head trainers of all NFL teams, as well as to NFLPA executive Stacey Robinson, that the distributor of StarCaps, Balanced Health Products, had been added to the league's list of prohibited dietary supplement companies. He also wrote that Robinson, who oversees steroid policy for the union, had added the distributor to the list of banned companies on the union's Web site.

The players contend that the NFL did not disclose WHY StarCaps was added to the list and that it contained bumetanide and therefore needed to inform every individual player of that specific ingredient. Given that the league did inform the powers that be that it was added to the banned list, I can't see how the suspended players can wiggle out of this.

The banned/not banned issue is NOT cut and dry....let's carefully re-read the quote from the NFL and see what it really says. It does not say the StarCaps the product is banned, it says (and twice I may add) that the company that makes StarCaps has been added to the list of prohibited/banned companies. The following is a quote from the lawyer hired by Kevin Williams:Renowed New York attorney Peter Ginsberg, who represented Kevin Williams in the appeal process, disputed the NFL's contention that StarCaps was added to the banned list of supplements.

"What the [NFL] did, in fact, was issue that notification for commercial purposes, telling players not to endorse the manufacturer of StarCaps," Ginsberg told ESPN. "There was absolutely no warning about a nondisclosed banned ingredient. [The notice] was purely for commercial reasons and without regard for the health, welfare and safety of the player. For Adolpho Birch or anyone associated with the NFL to suggest there was a specific warning [on StarCaps] is disingenuous and disappointing."

If this is indeed the case, and can be proven, I'd say that there is still plenty of wriggle room left here.

Sounds like the lawyer is spinning it to make his case look good.Is that what the banned lists are for? To keep players from endorsing products? I really don't know I am asking.

But from the NFL statements it sounded like the banned company lists were telling players not to use products from those companies because they may have banned substances.

Are there banned lists for different purposes?

Good questions, and I think that's why there is still wriggle room here because your responses illustrate the confusion. How many lists are there? How/why do you get on a list? Are there indeed companies on the list for reasons other than chemistry? You used the words "sounded like" and "may have" in describing the NFL statements...is that definitive enough to suspend somebody for 4 games?

David already explained this, but here's different wording:According to what we have read about the NFL's statements regarding the manufacturer of StarCaps, Balanced Health Products, there is no confusion. The two year old message was clear: don't take any products made by Balanced Health Products.

What we know happened: the Williams' (among others) took the products and tested positive for a banned substance in a banned product. It doesn't matter if they were masking a steroid use or not. The fact that is, they bought products from a company on the NFL's banned list and that list was provided to the NFLPA and, subsequently, the players through the NFLPA web site. It also doesn't matter why Balanced Health Products was on the list because the very nature of the list implies that the products listed (or in this case, any product made by Balanced Health Products) contain substances not allowed by NFL policy.

All confusion seems to be implied by the Williams' lawyer and looks like an attempt to place blame on folks other than those who swallowed the pills.

 

[ceo3west]

Anyone know the result of the hearing this morning? It was at 10:30am and nothing has been reported yet, this is unreal.. I thought this was the age of instant information?!

 

[Dash]

Anyone know the result of the hearing this morning? It was at 10:30am and nothing has been reported yet, this is unreal.. I thought this was the age of instant information?!

No word yet, but it could take all day (or longer) to get a decision and result. According to ESPN's John Clayton, if the NFL wins the Federal case they have to go back to the State court to get the paperwork through to overturn the injunction. How fast that happens would depend on court clerks.

 

[ceo3west]

Anyone know the result of the hearing this morning? It was at 10:30am and nothing has been reported yet, this is unreal.. I thought this was the age of instant information?!

No word yet, but it could take all day (or longer) to get a decision and result. According to ESPN's John Clayton, if the NFL wins the Federal case they have to go back to the State court to get the paperwork through to overturn the injunction. How fast that happens would depend on court clerks.

But the injunction only applied to the two Minnesota linemen correct? All I care about is McAllister as a Thomas owner, and I'm very confused about his status right now.

 

[ceo3west]

Suspension hearing involving Deuce McAllister, Will Smith continues

by Jay Weiner, Special to The Times-Picayune Friday December 05, 2008, 1:26 PM

ST. PAUL, MINN. - After two-and-a-half hours of arguments between lawyers for the NFL

and NFL Players Association, U.S. District Court Judge Paul Magnuson recessed the hearing and said NFL lawyers would get rebuttal time later Friday afternoon.

NFL lawyer Dan Nash has urged Magnuson to enforce Deuce McAllister's and Will Smith's suspensions for violating league drug policies by testing positive for the diuretic bumetanide.

 

[David Yudkin]

Federal judge blocks NFL suspensions of five players

ST. PAUL (AP) — A federal judge has blocked the NFL from suspending five players for violating the league's anti-doping policy. U.S. District Judge Paul Magnuson said Friday he needed more time to consider the case after hearing several hours of arguments from the league and the NFL Players Association.

Kevin Williams and Pat Williams of the Minnesota Vikings, and Charles Grant, Deuce McAllister and Will Smith of the New Orleans Saints all were suspended this week for four games. They tested positive for a banned diuretic in the dietary supplement StarCaps.

The union has argued the NFL didn't properly inform players about the substance. The NFL's attorneys argued that claim, and others, had been considered and rejected in a process set out by the league's collective bargaining agreement.

 

[Dash]

Federal judge blocks NFL suspensions of five players ST. PAUL (AP) — A federal judge has blocked the NFL from suspending five players for violating the league's anti-doping policy. U.S. District Judge Paul Magnuson said Friday he needed more time to consider the case after hearing several hours of arguments from the league and the NFL Players Association. Kevin Williams and Pat Williams of the Minnesota Vikings, and Charles Grant, Deuce McAllister and Will Smith of the New Orleans Saints all were suspended this week for four games. They tested positive for a banned diuretic in the dietary supplement StarCaps.The union has argued the NFL didn't properly inform players about the substance. The NFL's attorneys argued that claim, and others, had been considered and rejected in a process set out by the league's collective bargaining agreement.

Next thing you know the league will have to start testing the food these guys buy at McDonalds to make sure someone didn't sneak some cocaine in the fry salter. Though I guess that would be just for Matt Jones.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Federal judge blocks NFL suspensions of five players ST. PAUL (AP) — A federal judge has blocked the NFL from suspending five players for violating the league's anti-doping policy. U.S. District Judge Paul Magnuson said Friday he needed more time to consider the case after hearing several hours of arguments from the league and the NFL Players Association. Kevin Williams and Pat Williams of the Minnesota Vikings, and Charles Grant, Deuce McAllister and Will Smith of the New Orleans Saints all were suspended this week for four games. They tested positive for a banned diuretic in the dietary supplement StarCaps.The union has argued the NFL didn't properly inform players about the substance. The NFL's attorneys argued that claim, and others, had been considered and rejected in a process set out by the league's collective bargaining agreement.

Next thing you know the league will have to start testing the food these guys buy at McDonalds to make sure someone didn't sneak some cocaine in the fry salter. Though I guess that would be just for Matt Jones.

nobody is forcing the league to test anything.They are forcing the league to notify everybody properly IF they do test.BIG DIFFERENCE.

 

[Breesisdaman]

Federal judge blocks NFL suspensions of five players

ST. PAUL (AP) — A federal judge has blocked the NFL from suspending five players for violating the league's anti-doping policy. U.S. District Judge Paul Magnuson said Friday he needed more time to consider the case after hearing several hours of arguments from the league and the NFL Players Association.

Kevin Williams and Pat Williams of the Minnesota Vikings, and Charles Grant, Deuce McAllister and Will Smith of the New Orleans Saints all were suspended this week for four games. They tested positive for a banned diuretic in the dietary supplement StarCaps.

The union has argued the NFL didn't properly inform players about the substance. The NFL's attorneys argued that claim, and others, had been considered and rejected in a process set out by the league's collective bargaining agreement.

http://www.freep.com/article/20081205/SPOR...5088/1049/rss14And the correct decision to make I might add. Not as open and shut as some on here thought. Any way now for fantasy relevance. Deuce hasn't practiced much this week so dont look for him to steal many carries except maybe at the goal line. If the Suspension is permanently overturned then that is a different story for PT and Bush owners. Deuce is still a favorite with Saints fans and as long as he is active he is going to see some work.

 

[David Yudkin]

Federal judge blocks NFL suspensions of five players

ST. PAUL (AP) — A federal judge has blocked the NFL from suspending five players for violating the league's anti-doping policy. U.S. District Judge Paul Magnuson said Friday he needed more time to consider the case after hearing several hours of arguments from the league and the NFL Players Association.

Kevin Williams and Pat Williams of the Minnesota Vikings, and Charles Grant, Deuce McAllister and Will Smith of the New Orleans Saints all were suspended this week for four games. They tested positive for a banned diuretic in the dietary supplement StarCaps.

The union has argued the NFL didn't properly inform players about the substance. The NFL's attorneys argued that claim, and others, had been considered and rejected in a process set out by the league's collective bargaining agreement.

http://www.freep.com/article/20081205/SPOR...5088/1049/rss14And the correct decision to make I might add. Not as open and shut as some on here thought. Any way now for fantasy relevance. Deuce hasn't practiced much this week so dont look for him to steal many carries except maybe at the goal line. If the Suspension is permanently overturned then that is a different story for PT and Bush owners. Deuce is still a favorite with Saints fans and as long as he is active he is going to see some work.

What I think is intersting (at least IMO) is that the best argument that I can see is fighting whether the products in question should ever have been placed on a banned substance list in the first place (yet I haven't really seen that as an argument yet). It seems like the diurtic supplement these guys took didn't have any steroid compounds in it, on trace amounts of a masking agent.