Blog Entry

Willaims Wall should be sidelined

Posted on: September 11, 2009 5:50 pm
Edited on: September 11, 2009 5:54 pm
 
The Minnesota Vikings will have defensive tackles Kevin and Pat Williams Sunday against Cleveland, and probably will have them the entire season.

The New Orleans Saints will not have defensive ends Will Smith and Charles Grant the first four games.

All four men were expected to be suspended for the first four games of the season, but Williams and Williams were given a reprieve when a Minnesota circuit court ruled they would be eligible to play because of Minnesota laws on drug testing that overrde the CBA rules on testing.

Louisiana doesn't have those laws, so Smith and Grant won't play the first four games for using a banned diuretic, the same substance used by both of the Williamses.

That isn't right.

There is no way there should be a difference. If the Vikings players play, Grant and Smith should play. If they can't, the two Vikings can't.

It's called competitive imbalance.

Balance is the NFL way.

This isn't that. EVen the diehard Vikings fans have to know that it just isn't fair.

Of course come Sunday that will matter little -- if at all.



Category: NFL
Comments

Since: Apr 14, 2007
Posted on: September 12, 2009 11:30 pm
 

Willaims Wall should be sidelined

You couldn't be more wrong.

Those players were given the chance to review and understand the collective bargaining agreement that the Player's Union agreed to.

They chose to play in the NFL under the NFL's rules.
They got caught having taken a substance that every team was advised is not permitted, and like every player before them they should be suspended.

They also agreed, as did the Player's Union that this, and issues like these will be decided by an arbitrator. That ruling left them suspended and they used a loophole in the law of the state, that cannot supercede Federal Law. The law of the Land cannot overrule the law of the Nation for a Nation to exist.

The collective bargaining agreement was approved at the Federal level, and our new Government failed here.
 at the Federal level.

The NFL should sit them anyway. The worst thing that could happen is that they sue, after the current decision is settled, and win their gamechecks back. That's why they are doing it.

Heck the NFL could even settle later. But it would give the other 30 teams and the Saints mentioned here, the justice they deserve from every suspension and loss of key players they have experienced when violations occured.

Or maybe suspend them for the first 4 away games outside that Court's jurisdiction.

Come on NFL, get creative, they sure did!

I bet they wouldn't think it's fair. Just like every player ever hit with a questionable suspension, you know, like for a doctor prescribed inhaler.



Since: Sep 17, 2006
Posted on: September 12, 2009 8:06 pm
 

Willaims Wall should be sidelined

"...in my opinion, mistakenly holding that state law overrules a CBA negotiated and entered into under Federal Law.  IMO, the Minnesota court should have deferred to the federal law and the CBA so that different teams/players are not subject to different rights/obligations which is, after all, the entire point of collective bargaining...at least that's what they told me in law school."

Which law school was that? The same one that taught you NOT to read the court's opinion before spouting off at the mouth? The opinion (if your law school taught you how to read them) lists multiple precedents and many reasons that the CBA does not supercede the when it comes to the employees right to dispute the initial positive test and be granted a second.  On that point, it seems there is very little gray area. In fact, the NFL comes across in its arguments as desperate and disorganized. They claim the players are actually employees of the NFL, which is not a Minnesota employer but the CBA clearly states that the players are employees of the teams to which they are contracted. So when the CBA is convenient, they try to disregard it?

Without offering either a definition of "training camp" or a detailed account of the William's time, they claim that the state law is superceded because the use of the banned substance occurred during training camp and on the employers property.

Read the opinion before making stuff up, or did you miss that day of law school? Maybe the internet was down and you missed class.



Since: May 17, 2008
Posted on: September 12, 2009 4:58 pm
 

Willaims Wall should be sidelined

The fact is all four players should be suspended.  The CBA was agreed to by ALL of the players and the NFL and now that they don't like it two of those players are seeking to avoid the terms of that contract and, surprise, the court in the state of their team is helping by, in my opinion, mistakenly holding that state law overrules a CBA negotiated and entered into under Federal Law.  IMO, the Minnesota court should have deferred to the federal law and the CBA so that different teams/players are not subject to different rights/obligations which is, after all, the entire point of collective bargaining...at least that's what they told me in law school.



Since: Dec 31, 2006
Posted on: September 12, 2009 4:14 pm
 

Willaims Wall should be sidelined

EXACTLY!!!



Since: Dec 31, 2006
Posted on: September 12, 2009 4:11 pm
 

Willaims Wall should be sidelined

because he took a loaded weapon to a crowded place and it discharged. I love dogs but how can you compare those 2???



Since: Mar 16, 2008
Posted on: September 12, 2009 2:55 pm
 

Willaims Wall should be sidelined

 The guy Stallworth killed came from behind a tree and ran in to traffic.  Check the facts in the case, Stallworth was driving impaired, but the man jumped from behind a tree in to traffic and ended up accidentaly killing himself in the process.  So no, Stallworth should NOT have done more time.



Since: Aug 22, 2006
Posted on: September 12, 2009 2:14 pm
 

Willaims Wall should be sidelined

But Prisco's main emphasis is the call for the Williams wall to be suspended, though as you point out, he does make the statement that the NO players should get to play.



Since: Aug 22, 2006
Posted on: September 12, 2009 2:13 pm
 

Willaims Wall should be sidelined

"Second, the league has historically communicated to the NFLPA and the teams that StarCaps contains a banned substance."

Ah...not in this case...that is part of the problem. The NFL knew it was there BUT DID NOT communicate it on their call in listing of products that contain banned substance. Also, the label on Starcaps made no mention of the banned substance. IMO that is why this suspenision is not right in the first place, to go along with the potential damage that can happen to both teams over this suspension for something that is at best debatable.





Since: Aug 22, 2006
Posted on: September 12, 2009 2:08 pm
 

Willaims Wall should be sidelined

Given the apparent cloaking of the banned substance in starcaps since neither the label or NFL reported it being in there in the first place, and to make matters worse, the NFL knew it was in there and said nothing, I agree that fair is the NO Saints players playing, the NFL getting their info act together and taking some of the blame for not making that info available instead of penalizing players for what neither they, nor the product label itself listed as an ingredient.

Also fair is making sure everyone is on the same playing field. It is truly hard to believe that all players are held to and disciplined according to the same standard. I may very well be wrong about it, but it does seem teams and players get preferential treatment while others are made examples to give the appearance that rules are enforced. Small market clubs like MN and NO are fair game for that...just ask the TWolves. To believe the under the table contract issue with Joe Smith was/is not a common occurance in the NBA is at absolute best nieve if not downright laughable.

If the NFL was just about this, they would have made sure the info they had on hand was available so the players would know and not have to turn into chemists just to try and see if a banned substance is in the product in the first place.

The real problem is they are trying to showcase discipline in stead of administering it justly and fairly.

BTW - were players on other teams or big name players found to have this?



Since: Jan 12, 2008
Posted on: September 12, 2009 1:48 pm
 

Willaims Wall should be sidelined

Prisco:

Your idiocy continues to shine. The league errored and failed to recognize and follow the LAW of states where it conducts its business. The law is impartial and the league is not above it.

Get off of your high horse, Lord Farquaad. You can't make up rules as you go.



The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com