Another Log on the Fire - Williams Wall Still In Trouble

by Steve Ronkowski on May 14, 2009 12:26 AM CDT

I'm sure I wasn't the only one who was upset when Pat and Kevin Williams managed to finish playing the '08 season by getting an injunction against the NFL last December. It seems, however, that they may only have postponed the inevitable. For those of you are just tuning in, a brief refresher: Pat and Kevin Williams, along with three Saints players, tested positive for a banned substance (a masking agent) found in the weight-loss supplement they were taking to avoid triggering contract penalties (weight limits). The court granted them an injunction while it considered the players' arguments, which are now coming forward. This is where things start to look good for Viqueens haters everywhere.

Now, their new line is that when Pat Williams was with the Bills ('97-'03), that the pills were handed out in the locker room to all the players, making him think that they were NFL approved. Naturally, the Bills deny the claim, implying in a statement that this is something Williams' lawyer simply made up. The line in the story that makes me think that there might be more than just smoke here is:

tI remains to be explained what motivation a team official would have to distribute a supplement designed to allow a player to skirt team rules without a competitive edge.

Yes, and I would like to hear this explanation. Overall, it seems like they are just putting off the inevitable suspension, as people seem to think over at PFT. Goodell may be as hateful as any sports commissioner, but this is one area where I support strict penalties. Football needs to keep itself clean or at least keep its image clean, otherwise someone else will clean it up - see MLB for details.

Thoughts? I think this can definitely cost them a game or two, although their first four of the season aren't all exactly the toughest competition (@CLE, @DET, SF, GB). In any case, it's always good to seem them squirm.

This FanPost was written by a Windy City Gridiron member, and does not necessarily reflect the ideas or opinions of its staff or community.

Tweet Comment 25 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Nice job on this

Funny how their fans think it should all go away. Especially after a certain Mr. Ramirez from the Dodgers just got handed a 50 game suspension for using a masking agent. Should be interesting how this all ends up

Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways - Beer in one hand - brat in the other - body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming 'WOO HOO, What a Ride

by icarr0331 on May 14, 2009 2:28 AM CDT reply actions

Agreed

I think baseball has successfully sunk every “innocent mistake” defense against steroid charges – it’s just been used too many times.

by Steve Ronkowski on May 14, 2009 9:50 AM CDT up reply actions

Thanks for the updates

If these 2 do end up serving 4 game suspensions, there’s no way anyone could have the Vikings above the Bears.

by Mike Mueller on May 14, 2009 7:13 AM CDT reply actions

Isn't it interesting that the weight loss supplement just happened to have masking ...

chemicals in it? And that all of them chose this particular supplement out of all the weight loss products available? It stinks to high heaven and the league knows it.

by BigGeorgeTX on May 14, 2009 9:50 AM CDT reply actions

Kool aid is easier to swallow than reality

by Qgee on May 14, 2009 10:05 AM CDT reply actions

4 games is not enough of a punishment1

If you live in Chicago you are a bears fan, if you move from chicago you stay a bears fan, if you move to chicago you will be a bears fan.

by chi-town on May 14, 2009 10:17 AM CDT reply actions

What Stinks

What stank for me, is that a MN judge gave them a forbarrence until after their playoff run. Conflict of interests anyone?

by Roger_lederer on May 14, 2009 10:20 AM CDT reply actions

lol

yeah, that whole thing stinked. if they were suspended the bears are in the playoffs easily.

If you want to crown em...

by JohnnyTruant on May 14, 2009 3:43 PM CDT up reply actions

Nice post SSP.

I think that we have to be very careful about how much of the media reports we put our trust in. I have been following this story relatively closely, and I know that there are way too many things that the media and us ordinary folks don’t know about and don’t understand.

That being said, I think you hit the nail on the head when you mentioned the first 4 games that the Vikes play… it’s not like the Williamses would be missing very tough games.

Be nice. Flag comments that you think are offensive. Use the "reply" button. Drink plenty of water. Compliment others. Rec comments and posts you like. Don't call people names. If you don't like someone's comment, attack the comment and not the commentor. Learn the difference in your/you're, then/than, to/too. Exercise. Relax. Stretch often. Find good in the world.

by Dane Noble on May 14, 2009 10:22 AM CDT reply actions

I guess the best possible outcome

would be for all the backroom wheeling-and-dealing to drag out the whole process for months and months, how about, say, until November? My honest guess, though, is that the NFL is going to wait it out a bit longer and then come to some sort of settlement with the affected players – reduced suspensions in exchange for dropping all the court cases. But as one game could be all the difference we need to win the North, let’s hope someone can take advantage of the situation.

by Steve Ronkowski on May 14, 2009 10:55 AM CDT up reply actions

They're awful touchy

about that subject over on the Daily Norseman, makes me laugh to read about how they’re defending them, saying that they are being role models and standing up for themselves, I hope they get suspended and the Vikes lose their first four games, that would be like an early Christmas for me

(Asshole Sr) "If you learn one thing here, NEVER pass out in Ohio."

by ThorCo on May 14, 2009 10:35 AM CDT reply actions

Anyone else think there should be something added to the bargaining agreement...

If you fight a suspension and the ruling is upheld, whatever the suspension is you tack on the games played as well, such as 4 game suspension, contested, two more games are played, upheld = 6 game suspension?

by Jacob Hayes on May 14, 2009 10:39 AM CDT reply actions

I wouldn't think so...

simply because there are always going to be gray areas. Sometimes, mistakes and accidents really are made, on both the league’s part, the team’s part, and the player’s part. It would be tough to penalize someone for losing an appeal, especially since appeals are allowed by law.

by Dane Noble on May 14, 2009 10:51 AM CDT up reply actions

Right...

But I’m pretty sure it’s the CBA that gives them the right to appeal for months upon end, it’s seriously getting to the point where players are picking and choosing whether to appeal or not based solely on what position their team is playing in. Tough competition next week? Appeal. Blow out against Lions? Take it. Playoff hunt? Appeal. Out of the playoffs? Take it.

Seriously, I’m all for appealing if you think you’ve been wronged. I’m completely against appealing just to get a more favorable time for your suspension.

by Jacob Hayes on May 15, 2009 11:46 AM CDT up reply actions

And that is the nature of our legal system.

It is something that is put in place to protect people, but it can also be taken advantage of. There are some judges who will deny frivolous appeals, but it is a very delicate situation to have to make that call.

by Dane Noble on May 15, 2009 11:53 AM CDT up reply actions

My issue is...

In most cases the appeals are done in less than a week, whereas we’re how deep in an appeals process for the Williams Duo?

I wouldn’t even care if it was an automatic suspension for X games regardless of appeal, and if you win the appeal you get paid as if you played. I mean realistically, how many appeals have actually went anywhere, specially drug appeals. 1?

It may be the nature of our legal system, but this isn’t something that results in jail time or anything like that. It’s a employer/employee relationship, governed by the CBA that is currently being renegotiated.

The on the field suspensions are usually reviewed and done before the next game, there is zero reason for these drug suspensions to drag out for months.

by Jacob Hayes on May 15, 2009 1:42 PM CDT up reply actions

Considering the nature of some of the arguments,

the NFLPA and the courts have run into some definite gray areas as far as the policy and procedure side of the banned substance situation. It is not something that is cut and dry or black and white.

Here is an update on where this sits… linky linky (pops)

by Dane Noble on May 15, 2009 1:49 PM CDT up reply actions

Yeah, pretty much where I thought it was...

The Williams are going to skate due to the NFL testing and not disclosing that it contained a banned substance. That is perfectly reasonable, the fact that at least one person already accepted their suspension for this isn’t really.

All that’s going to come of this is that the NFL is going to stop doing testing of any kind on any supplements so it will go back to being a cut and dry situation, like it should be.

by Jacob Hayes on May 15, 2009 3:10 PM CDT up reply actions

I am a cycling fan.

Doping has been rampant in cycling for years, unfortunately, but at least the pro peleton has REAL enforcement rules.

First violation, you are instantly fired. You lose all the prize money you have earned for any of the races you have run under suspicion, you lose any of the podium places you have one, and your entire salary. 2 years suspension plus you can’t resign with a “Pro Tour” team (the best teams that ride all the big races) for four years.

Second violation: another 4 year ban (effectively this is a lifetime ban from cycling).

No drug counseling, no nothing. Your ass is GONE.

Each rider is tested randomly as many as 30 times per year, and are on call to be tested 24/7. They have to send in their travel itineraries in the off season so the doping testers can find them in whatever country they are in. If they don’t, then that is considered a doping violation that will lead to suspension (that’s what happened to Michael Rasmussen a couple years ago, he was leading the Tour De France and his team sacked him for LOOKING like he MIGHT have cheated).

They are tested after every win, or every podium spot, or whenever they are a leader in any of the categories, in addition to random testing.

One confirmed violation, BOOM you are gone.

The reason that cycling is catching so many cheaters is that they are CATCHING them. Other pro sports are likely just as rife with cheaters as cycling, they just are not CATCHING many of them and when they do, it’s a slap on the wrist.

People talk about manny being suspended for 1/4 of one year for being an admitted cheater. Big whoop. I say ban is ass for 2 years.

US pro sports leagues are not in any way serious about stopping cheaters.

by sabbath999 on May 14, 2009 10:43 AM CDT reply actions

I completely agree

test these guys all the time. Test them in the offseason, test them right before games, test them after games. I don’t care. I hate cheaters.

Cost of test is about $50. I’m sure that the NFL can afford that.

If you want to crown em...

by JohnnyTruant on May 14, 2009 3:42 PM CDT up reply actions

by Adam T on May 14, 2009 2:52 PM CDT up reply actions

I lol'd @ you boss.

by Dane Noble on May 14, 2009 2:54 PM CDT up reply actions

What bothers me more

is that it was a state judge, that had no authority over the matter, was the first person to block the suspensions. Being a union matter it should have been a federal matter from the start.

We are who we think we are.

by Bearfan1973 on May 14, 2009 5:45 PM CDT reply actions