What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Harrison, Matthews, others facing indefinite suspension (1 Viewer)

Godsbrother

Footballguy
NFL says James Harrison, Clay Matthews will be suspended if interviews not conducted
Tom Pelissero, USA TODAY Sports 9:08 p.m. EDT August 15, 2016

The NFL will suspend indefinitely the four active players at the center of the league’s performance-enhancing drug probe if they don’t provide interviews to the league by Aug. 25.

Pittsburgh Steelers linebacker James Harrison, Green Bay Packers linebackers Clay Matthews and Julius Peppers and free-agent linebacker Mike Neal will be suspended beginning Aug. 26 if they haven’t cooperated, NFL senior vice president of labor policy and league affairs Adolpho Birch told the NFL Players Association in a letter Monday that was first obtained by USA TODAY Sports.

The suspensions would be for conduct detrimental, and separate from any possible discipline the players would face under the league's drug policies, Birch's letter said. Each player would remain suspended until he has participated in an interview with the league's investigators, after which NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell "will determine whether and when the suspension should be lifted."

Allegations that the four players were linked to performance-enhancing drugs were first raised in the Al Jazeera America documentary The Dark Side. The NFL Players Association previously stated that affidavits submitted by the four players in July constituted reasonable cooperation, but the league maintained its position.

Birch's letter says Neal lied in his statement, which "includes an assertion that is demonstrably false" — hammering home the need for interviews. Neal's initial letter said he had never violated the league's policy on performance-enhancing drugs before, but he was suspended in 2012 for an infraction. A revised statement was provided to correct that section.

The union also argued that players should not be required to cooperate with the investigation because Charlie Sly, the former anti-aging clinic who implicated the players in hidden-camera footage in the documentary, later recanted his claims.

The NFL announced in July that it had closed its separate investigation into former Denver Broncos quarterback Peyton Manning, whom Sly also implicated in recorded conversations. The union no longer represents the retired Manning, but the league said he and his wife, Ashley, “were fully cooperative with the investigation and provided both interviews and access to all records sought by the investigators.”

The league has established precedent in punishing players for non-compliance alone, as then-Vikings quarterback Brett Favre was fined $50,000 in 2010 for “failure to cooperate ... in a forthcoming manner” in a league investigation into the alleged sending of an illicit photos to a New York Jets employee in 2008.

The full text of Birch's letter is below:

As you know, the league has been investigating a nationally televised report concerning potential violations of the collectively bargained Policy on Performance-Enhancing Substances.  There can be no question that the league has a good faith basis for conducting this investigation; moreover, the league and NFLPA have a shared interest in ensuring that our jointly developed policy is not being violated.

Nevertheless, since the initiation of our investigation in January the league has made at least seven attempts to arrange interviews of Messrs. Harrison, Matthews, Neal and Peppers.  On each occasion, the NFLPA has communicated the players’ refusal to participate.  Most recently, the NFLPA has attempted to prevent the interviews by submitting for each player a half-page statement, which you advised should be treated as a sworn statement given in a legal proceeding, and which you contend should fulfill the players’ acknowledged obligation to cooperate with the investigation.  The statements, however, are wholly devoid of any detail, and we were quickly able to determine that Mr. Neal’s statement includes an assertion that is demonstrably false.  Rather than eliminate the need for interviews, the players’ plainly deficient statements simply underscore the importance of obtaining their full cooperation.

You were so advised on July 29, when we again wrote to offer the players another opportunity to participate in an interview, beginning with Mr. Neal.  In that letter, you were expressly notified that continued noncooperation could result in discipline up to and including a suspension.  In response, you provided a revised statement and letter which acknowledged Mr. Neal’s prior steroid policy violation and that his previous “sworn statement” is in fact untrue.  Most important, you advised that Mr. Neal had again refused to cooperate with our investigation by participating in an interview.

There is no dispute that players are obligated to cooperate with the league’s investigation, as you have repeatedly acknowledged.  This obligation includes not only the responsibility to submit to an interview but also the duty to provide meaningful responses to the questions posed.  Nor is there a dispute that a failure to cooperate or an attempt to obstruct the investigation may result in discipline, including suspension from play, for conduct detrimental under Article 46 of the CBA and the NFL Player Contract.

We cannot accept your unilateral assertion that the cursory, untested statements you have submitted satisfy the players’ obligation.  Accordingly, the Commissioner has directed that Messrs. Harrison, Matthews, Neal and Peppers be given until Thursday, August 25 to provide interviews.  For those players whose interviews do not take place on or before that date, or who fail meaningfully to participate in or otherwise obstruct the interview, their actions will constitute conduct detrimental and they will be suspended, separate and apart from any possible future determination that they violated the steroid policy.  The suspension for each such player will begin on Friday, August 26 and will continue until he has fully participated in an interview with league investigators, after which the Commissioner will determine whether and when the suspension should be lifted.

To avoid this outcome, please promptly contact my office to make arrangements for the interviews.  As previously stated, we will make every effort to accommodate the NFLPA’s availability, within the outlined time period.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2016/08/15/james-harrison-clay-matthews-al-jazeera-america-peds/88800352/

 
What evidence does the NFL have that's any different than the evidence against Manning?
Nothing that I know of.  I think they may actually had more on Manning but he "cooperated".  On the other hand he also retired so there really isn't much the NFL could do anyway.

 
What evidence does the NFL have that's any different than the evidence against Manning?
None that they've talked about.  And the guy who originally brought it up was discredited and recanted his story.  The NFL has no leg to stand on, and they don't give a F**K.

They're basically flexing their power and saying, from now on if players don't do whatever we say, we can suspend them.  And based on the Brady case, I'm not sure the NFLPA can stop them.

Still proud that the Steelers saw this coming and were the only team to not sign the CBA.  All other teams are idiots.

 
Like steelers1080 and GB alluded to, This is purely a labor relations dispute - NFL likely has 0 on these guys and simply wants to interview them either A.) To set some sort of precedent going forward when it comes to allegations of a certain player or B.) Because ultimately they want the NFLPA to kiss the ring on Goodell's finger and threaten indefinite suspensions/loss of salary to get the players to cave in and get their way.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Where does this end though? Random people could make allegations late in the year, have it picked up by a news outlet that can't research for crap, and have a key player potentially suspended, or at least distracted by an investigation.

NFL, take note, Andy Dalton has used PEDs.  I have zero evidence, and I will later recant my story, but believe me, he did it.

Bam, investigated/distracted/possibly suspended.

 
Where does this end though? Random people could make allegations late in the year, have it picked up by a news outlet that can't research for crap, and have a key player potentially suspended, or at least distracted by an investigation.

NFL, take note, Andy Dalton has used PEDs.  I have zero evidence, and I will later recant my story, but believe me, he did it.

Bam, investigated/distracted/possibly suspended.
That's why NFLPA will fight this like crazy to make sure baseless allegations dont put players in a compromising position where the NFL can constantly pepper players anytime there is speculation, whether it is merited or not.

 
Having real trouble seeing what the big deal is. If the letter above is accurate, it seems as though the league is following the CBA and had requested interviews as is required. Again, if the statement above is accurate the NFLPA and the players have acknowledged this but instead sent in a statement to the league instead of showing up for the interviews, which the league is not accepting as a substitute for the interviews.   It further sounds to me that the NFLPA understands the substance of the CBA but is refusing to comply with it. This is a contract that they agreed to abide by. 

The NFL does not stand to gain anything by suspending the players. That diminishes their brand that they are very careful to protect. All I see is that the league is asking the players to abide by the CBA. So if the report is false, as it appears to be, what is the big deal?  Fly to the NFL offices, fulfill the obligations of the CBA by being interviewed, and then fly home exonerated. 

Seems as as though this is getting blown way out of proportion and further may not be the right spot where the NFLPA has a legitimate out per the CBA and maybe shouldn't be placing these players in a position where they would be suspended for not cooperating. 

 
The problem is that the accusations are baseless and have been recanted.  The NFL should have just dropped the investigation, but instead it's requiring the players to jump through hoops because a news organization didn't bother to research it's own story.

This individual incident isn't a huge deal, it's just a pain in the ###, but it could set a precedent that screws over the players.

The NFL is basically flexing after winning the Brady debacle. They're pushing the boundaries to see what they can get away with.

 
None that they've talked about.  And the guy who originally brought it up was discredited and recanted his story.  The NFL has no leg to stand on, and they don't give a F**K.

They're basically flexing their power and saying, from now on if players don't do whatever we say, we can suspend them.  And based on the Brady case, I'm not sure the NFLPA can stop them.

Still proud that the Steelers saw this coming and were the only team to not sign the CBA.  All other teams are idiots.
Still proud?? Give me a break

 
The problem is that the accusations are baseless and have been recanted.  The NFL should have just dropped the investigation, but instead it's requiring the players to jump through hoops because a news organization didn't bother to research it's own story.

This individual incident isn't a huge deal, it's just a pain in the ###, but it could set a precedent that screws over the players.

The NFL is basically flexing after winning the Brady debacle. They're pushing the boundaries to see what they can get away with.


How are the players being "screwed over"?  The NFL has asked for interviews as is its right per the CBA and if the letter above is correct, the NFLPA is refusing to comply with the CBA. 

Going in for interviews does not expand the league's power at all under the CBA. This was a national story and the process of the CBA was put in place. Even if the story has been recanted, call it due diligence on the part of the league because of the magnitude and notoriety of the story which again is in alignment with the CBA.  There is very real interest from the league in performing the interviews, examining the "evidence", and then releasing a national headline that it has performed its own investigation, the charges are unfounded, the players above reproach, and the story is nothing but bull**** .  If it doesn't do its own investigation then it can't make that kind of news splash - which I might add is very much to the benefit of the players named  

The league has no interest in reeling in players for an endless stream of interviews for every little whisper - it makes money by putting the best pro athletes out on the field and it knows this.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Having real trouble seeing what the big deal is. If the letter above is accurate, it seems as though the league is following the CBA and had requested interviews as is required. Again, if the statement above is accurate the NFLPA and the players have acknowledged this but instead sent in a statement to the league instead of showing up for the interviews, which the league is not accepting as a substitute for the interviews.   It further sounds to me that the NFLPA understands the substance of the CBA but is refusing to comply with it. This is a contract that they agreed to abide by. 

The NFL does not stand to gain anything by suspending the players. That diminishes their brand that they are very careful to protect. All I see is that the league is asking the players to abide by the CBA. So if the report is false, as it appears to be, what is the big deal?  Fly to the NFL offices, fulfill the obligations of the CBA by being interviewed, and then fly home exonerated.

Seems as as though this is getting blown way out of proportion and further may not be the right spot where the NFLPA has a legitimate out per the CBA and maybe shouldn't be placing these players in a position where they would be suspended for not cooperating. 
First, who's to say whether there's truth in the report? Even recanted statements can be true or have elements of truth in them.

Second, having seen people questioned about things they didn't do, it's still a pain and it makes those people nervous. 

 
First, who's to say whether there's truth in the report? Even recanted statements can be true or have elements of truth in them.

Second, having seen people questioned about things they didn't do, it's still a pain and it makes those people nervous. 


Thanks. You just made the perfect argument as to why the league should be continuing with the process per the CBA - due diligence despite the recantation.  This appears to be a case of intentional noncompliance on the part of the NFLPA - again, if the letter posted above is stating facts.  To what end?  Maybe they feel the need to "win one" after the Brady case and are willing to sacrifice these players to try to do so. 

 
Thanks. You just made the perfect argument as to why the league should be continuing with the process per the CBA - due diligence despite the recantation.  This appears to be a case of intentional noncompliance on the part of the NFLPA - again, if the letter posted above is stating facts.  To what end?  Maybe they feel the need to "win one" after the Brady case and are willing to sacrifice these players to try to do so. 
Thanks. 

Fwiw, I actually agree with the NFL in seeking these interviews.  While different, it's in a similar vain as when we get a complaint of rape.  CID investigates as much as they can - the biggest difference here being the subject actually has rights in that investigation.  This isn't criminal and the CBA doesn't seem to protect these players. Maybe that should be renegotiated but for now, compliance will be rewarded. 

 
If I were one of these players and had done nothing wrong and the NFL was hounding me because of some baseless accusations that were later recanted I would be pissed too.   By threatening them with suspension the NFL is saying these players are guilty and must prove their innocence.  

Really screwed up process but, just as in the Brady case, the NFLPA agreed to it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If I were one of these players and had done nothing wrong and the NFL was hounding me because of some baseless accusations that were later recanted I would be pissed too.   By threatening them with suspension the NFL is saying these players are guilty and must prove their innocence.  

Really screwed up process but, just as in the Brady case, the NFLPA agreed to it.


No, that is not the league's position. The league is saying to the players that they must comply with the CBA here and will suspend them if they fail to do so. I have not seen any statements from the league about its position on their guilt or innocence. It could be that the league is performing its own investigation to completely and publicly clear the players - which benefits everyone except Al Jazeera and the news sources that ran with their story. 

 
A lot of people who immediately buy that Sly was lying when all the evidence is to the contrary, simply because he did the only thing he could do and recanted after discovering he had been secretly filmed. They uncovered quite a bit of circumstantial evidence, especially towards Peyton.

That being said the league is absolutely gonna #### anyone who doesn't walk the line, the lockout will be here before 2020.

 
Harrison has been the most outspoken player against Goodell's seemingly unchecked power. I don't think there's any coincidence that the league is making an example out of him in this case. 

 
I'm guessing now that part of the reason for "clearing Peyton Manning" early here was because he has a high enough public profile to rally attention and support.  If they tried this on him, he would be the PR frontman that would turn casual fans against the league.

As it stands, the casual fan is probably saying "Clay Who?  Why should I care?" which is just what the league wants for this power play.

 
A lot of people who immediately buy that Sly was lying when all the evidence is to the contrary, simply because he did the only thing he could do and recanted after discovering he had been secretly filmed. They uncovered quite a bit of circumstantial evidence, especially towards Peyton.

That being said the league is absolutely gonna #### anyone who doesn't walk the line, the lockout will be here before 2020.
Well..he recanted...it was a crap piece...the organization that reported it is defunct...

That said...CBA gives him the power.  Players association just adding more to theogrievances with what they agreed to.

 
Coincidentally, Steelers linebacker James Harrison was given a random PED test today

August 16, 2016 7:38 AM

By Ed Bouchette / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

James Harrison began playing pee-wee football at age 11 at the urging of his friends in Ohio “and I just happened to be halfway decent at it.”

Twenty-seven years later, he remains much more than halfway decent at the game that has provided for his own two sons, the oldest of whom now wants to play tackle football. At the moment, 8-year-old James III plays flag football and his dad told him he can play tackle only when he can be there to make sure he is being taught and using the proper techniques.

So, he will retire from the NFL first, actually for a second time after his short-lived retirement before the 2014 season. He wants to play this season, maybe even next, but first there is this lingering drama that must be cleared up before the league will allow him to do that.

The NFL wants to interview Harrison about a story that Al-Jazeera America television ran last year in which a man stated he supplied Harrison and three other NFL stars – Peyton Manning and Green Bay defenders Julius Peppers and Clay Matthews III – with PEDs banned by the league.

Pharmacist intern Charlie Sly, the source who accused Harrison et. al. in the AJA story, since retracted those accusations, telling ESPN’s Chris Mortensen that he lied to a reporter for the story that ran last December.

The network, Al Jazeera America itself has since gone defunct.

Nevertheless, the NFL has taken the accusations seriously enough to threaten the players.

Manning, who has retired, complied with the NFL’s request and was cleared. So far, the other three have not consented to an interview and the league gave them until Aug. 25 to do so or be immediately suspended. Coincidentally (?) Harrison said on Facebook that he was given what he termed a random PED test this morning at Saint Vincent College.

Harrison has been the most vocal in his resistance, and thus gained the most attention. He provided the NFL with an affidavit testifying he has never used banned substances and also parodied the situation by asserting before training camp began that he would agree to an interview provided Roger Goodell come to his home to do so.

Now the NFL has stepped things up and by now the players should know the league will follow through and suspend them if they do not comply. Just ask Tom Brady.

It would seem to be a simple task by the three current players (plus free agent Mike Neal) to accede to the league’s request, deny everything – as Harrison did in his affidavit – and be done with it.

It has appeared that the NFL Players Association somehow was involved in aiding the players to resist giving the interviews. 

“It’s the union,” one Steelers source told the Post-Gazette. 

That is the group that also gave away certain rights of its players in the collective bargaining agreement in 2011 in which the Steelers were the only team to vote “no.’’ So, the league has the right to demand the interviews or follow through with its threatened punishment. 

Harrison is a proud man and you may understand why an innocent man would not want to be dragged through this process. Because of the way he has taken such a strong stance, there has to remain the question of whether he actually will go through with the interview or just call it quits.

I spoke with Harrison Monday after practice and wrote a story in which he said the issue was “a done deal.’’ That was before the NFL later issued its letter to the union threatening the suspension if he and the others were not interviewed by Aug. 25.

Will he or won’t he? We can all sit here and say he should do so, get it behind him and move on with the season. It would make little sense for James Harrison to go out this way. He will be a Hall of Fame candidate five years after he leaves the game and that wonderful career should not end with this still hanging over his head.

But that may not be how James Harrison looks at things.

 
The Packer players need to stop screwing around on this.  We are talking their top two outside linebackers.  If their stand on not consenting to interviews causes them to both be suspended for discipline it will gut the Packers defensive scheme.  That would be too big a hit at one position. Sure these men have obligations to their own principles and maybe to their Union, but they also have an obligation to their organization.  They need to get this cleared up.  Their coworkers, several of whom are potentially in their only year or last year in the league are relying on them.

 
How are the players being "screwed over"?  The NFL has asked for interviews as is its right per the CBA and if the letter above is correct, the NFLPA is refusing to comply with the CBA. 
The NFL has screwed over players in the past who complied. Why would players want to risk the same thing happening to them?

Look at Anthony Hargrove.  He complied 100% with the NFL during bountygate. They said that he yelled, "Pay me my money." after sacking and hurting Favre. He always denied it. They basically ended his career through suspension, then through film proved that he in fact did not yell that.  Oops. Man's career over, they issued a very quiet apology and moved on.

This could happen to any of these players. They could comply, the NFL could feel they didn't comply enough and suspend them/give them a poor reputation. The best possible situation is that the players will prove what they stated all along, while there's plenty of things that could go wrong.

If the person who alleged the thing in the first place comes out later and says "I Lied." that should be the end of it.  Also, Harrison gets a "random" drug test today? Yeah, ok.

 
The Packer players need to stop screwing around on this.  We are talking their top two outside linebackers.  If their stand on not consenting to interviews causes them to both be suspended for discipline it will gut the Packers defensive scheme.  That would be too big a hit at one position. Sure these men have obligations to their own principles and maybe to their Union, but they also have an obligation to their organization.  They need to get this cleared up.  Their coworkers, several of whom are potentially in their only year or last year in the league are relying on them.
IF they have nothing to hide it is time to get this thing off the table. Matthews has had rumors of PED use since his days at USC, it would not surprise me if he has something to hide.

 
The Packer players need to stop screwing around on this.  We are talking their top two outside linebackers.  If their stand on not consenting to interviews causes them to both be suspended for discipline it will gut the Packers defensive scheme.  That would be too big a hit at one position. Sure these men have obligations to their own principles and maybe to their Union, but they also have an obligation to their organization.  They need to get this cleared up.  Their coworkers, several of whom are potentially in their only year or last year in the league are relying on them.
Isn't the most likely outcome that they do nothing, the league hands out a suspension on Friday, and next week a judge issues a stay while the whole thing gets hashed out in court?  I'm expecting that's the NFLPA's plan for fighting this, and it won't gut the defenses of the players in question for some time.

Besides, what if Clay is completely innocent, but happened to have replaced his cell phone in the past few months?  It should be obvious why he wouldn't want to go talk to the Commissioner in that case, right?

 
IF they have nothing to hide it is time to get this thing off the table. Matthews has had rumors of PED use since his days at USC, it would not surprise me if he has something to hide.
I'd be willing a significant chunk of the NFL has something to hide.  The point is the NFLPA is using Clay and Peppers has pawns in their foolish standoff with the NFL.  I agree the NFL shouldn't be allowed to badger players every time an allegation comes forth but the current CBA gives them the right.  The players should've never signed the agreement as currently written.

 
Redacted statements aren't evidence. I'd interview the people in the story to see if there is any before doing anything.

 
Thanks. You just made the perfect argument as to why the league should be continuing with the process per the CBA - due diligence despite the recantation.  This appears to be a case of intentional noncompliance on the part of the NFLPA - again, if the letter posted above is stating facts.  To what end?  Maybe they feel the need to "win one" after the Brady case and are willing to sacrifice these players to try to do so. 
Try reading between the lines.  Has nothing to do with the NFL wanting the players to stay within the CBA 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Redacted statements aren't evidence. I'd interview the people in the story to see if there is any before doing anything.
You mean recanted?

Either way Sly was just the one to let it slip, they contacted multiple employees at the clinic that confirmed hgh was being sent to some of these people. The MLB has already suspended players that were named in this case, they are suing the MLB - who knows how that will go.

Whether they did anything is very far from the issue, the NFL is trying to seize complete control of the players. The NFLPA is trying everything to hold them off.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The NFL has cleared James Harrison, Julius Peppers, and Clay Matthews of any wrongdoing as a result of the Al Jazeera report.
The three players, along with free agent DE Mike Neal, were linked to PEDs last year. Players from the MLB were also mentioned in the flimsy report, but MLB cleared them a while back. Harrison, Matthews, and Peppers completed interviews with the league last week and can carry on with their lives.

 
And there you have it.  The league does its due diligence, closes its investigation, clears the players, and makes a very public announcement about it.  

What an evil entity the NFL is.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
As usual the NFL needlessly made a big issue out of nothing which tarnished the reputation of their players and the league.

 
Why shouldn't the players be tested every game? Or every week?

I get that the CBA stipulates this, but still, if PEDs and recreational drugs are a big issue, test away.

 
Why shouldn't the players be tested every game? Or every week?

I get that the CBA stipulates this, but still, if PEDs and recreational drugs are a big issue, test away.
Because they don't actually want to catch players. And if they usually only test once a year in april, then players can smoke weed all year to help recover from injuries and the NFL can be like, don't ask don't tell.

Also, it's such BS that they give "random" tests after players have amazing games or play well at an older age. Random my a**. James Harrison has been tested like 8 times this season when most other players have been tested less than half as much.

 
Why shouldn't the players be tested every game? Or every week?

I get that the CBA stipulates this, but still, if PEDs and recreational drugs are a big issue, test away.
They're playing football, they aren't air traffic controllers.  

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top