Vikings fat defensive linemen cheat and get away with it

by tempchad on Sep 11, 2009 11:46 AM CDT Comment 22 comments

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/12191396

I didn't see this covered already so apologies if it was. But it looks like the Vikings defensive line will be at full strength as the Cheating WIlliams got a favorable federal court appeal in their favor.

While I still like the Bears chances this year, I was hoping that a couple of teams could hang a loss or two on them early to help us in the standing. That being said, I don't think they were losing to Cleveland regardless.

0 recs | Comment 22 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Read More: Chicago Bears, Minnesota Vikings

Comments

Yep

I almost posted this the other day from SI, but I guess it was to be expected.

No risk of punishment yet for the Williams wall, which sucks. I’d really have liked them to start the season with a rough patch. That said, there is every chance that they could end up suspended when it comes time for us to play them.

I just don’t get why it’s a matter for the courts. It’s a clause in every NFL contract that players must accept. How can you fight that?

by Virto on Sep 11, 2009 12:03 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

i'm not sure about all the legalese but i think it had to do with what they were found using

versus what was actually on the list at the time they were using. or something like that.

regardless, I never thought they would be suspended when we played them. I was hoping that one of the the first four opponents could steal a win when they shouldn’t have. Having said that:

Sep 13 @Cleveland 10:00am
Sep 20 @Detroit 10:00am
Sep 27 San Francisco 10:00am
Oct 5 Green Bay

I doubt the would have lost any 1 of the first 3. and can still lose game 4. but they are at home.

I was told that I ruined this house with my anger

by tempchad on Sep 11, 2009 12:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Who knows

Depends on Favre really. He can win a lot of games, but there’s a possibility that they Vikes will need to spend a lot of time hammering the run and trying to keep Favre from LOSING the games.

I don’t see any of those teams, aside from the Pack, putting up a lot of points on that defense, but last year we put up what, 40+?

Any team can win any day. If they go in thinking they can’t lose, they might just find themselves losing for being overconfident.

by Virto on Sep 11, 2009 12:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

48 - 41

That game was an embarrassment.

Though, if you want to get technical, you only put up 27 against our defense. Another 21 points were scored on turnovers and special teams.

I could go over what a mess the whole StarCaps situation is, but it would be a waste of my time. I come down on the Williams side due to the NFL endangering their health by not divulging that StarCaps contain a diuretic. You don’t. We’ll move on.

When you go to somebody's house, you don't crap on their floor. Being a fan of one team does NOT give you license to be a dick to fans of another.

Corollary: When people are visiting your house and behaving themselves, them being a fan of a different team is NOT a reason for you to piss in their beer.

by Robert Rence on Sep 11, 2009 1:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Only 27?

If you want to get technical, you still lost. 27 points is not an insignificant number, especially by the offense that we fielded. Of course we split the wins last year, but really, the defense failed to stop the offense. It doesn’t matter if the points come from special teams or from picks, it only matters who wins, and who loses. Just like you beat us on Sunday night, all that matters is that we lost, and you won.

I admit I’m not totally aware of all the details of the Williams’ situations, but at the same time I’m not sitting here screaming for heads to roll because they aren’t on my team. Chances are you have some bias based on your loyalty, even if you don’t realize it. Things like this usually explode in a big flame fest, so we can agree on the need to move on.

by Virto on Sep 11, 2009 1:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yep, we still lost.

And like I said, it was an embarrassment.

My major bias is losing Korey Stringer to heat stroke while on a Diuretic. Given that case, I feel it’s a valid concern for any NFL player to be provided with info regarding unlisted diuretics being contained in supplements.

When you go to somebody's house, you don't crap on their floor. Being a fan of one team does NOT give you license to be a dick to fans of another.

Corollary: When people are visiting your house and behaving themselves, them being a fan of a different team is NOT a reason for you to piss in their beer.

by Robert Rence on Sep 11, 2009 2:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

STS

is part of the game. There are so many fans that conveniently forget about the 3rd phase. Saying ignorant things like “the only reason your team won was because our shoddy STS.” My answer…get better coaches/players for the 3rd phase. Most games do come down to field position or mistakes made fielding the ball.

"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject." -Sir Winston Churchill

by propheteer on Sep 11, 2009 2:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not saying that Special Teams isn't important.

I’m saying that the Defense gave up 27 points. Not 48. One of the touchdowns was a ST touchdown, two others were fumbles returned for TDs.

Our ST coach was hired by the Rams (and good riddance), several minor free-agent signings have been done “to improve the Special Teams” including signing Lewis and dropping Wade this week. Additionally, it looks like Kluwe has been NOT out-kicking his coverage this pre-season. And if that’s the case, we’ll hopefully not give up 7 special teams touchdowns this year and assorted ridiculous run-backs.

When you go to somebody's house, you don't crap on their floor. Being a fan of one team does NOT give you license to be a dick to fans of another.

Corollary: When people are visiting your house and behaving themselves, them being a fan of a different team is NOT a reason for you to piss in their beer.

by Robert Rence on Sep 11, 2009 2:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

As much as i want to blame them

the banned substance was put into the “Starcaps” pills without being put on the label. That’s why the court upheld their plea. Why the NFL didn’t let this go, I have no idea. But now the Saints lose 2 players and the vikings don’t. So much for parity.

"If God had wanted man to play soccer, He wouldn't have given us arms" - Ditka

by EricEmpire on Sep 11, 2009 10:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hey FAT LINEMAN

U Raaaaang! Gotta love Little Giants.

Phil: " Whose baby is that?
Alan: "Check his collar or something." - The Hangover

by ANYTIME09 on Sep 11, 2009 1:42 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Problem

is the inequities this case raises for the Saints D-linemen. Also, there must be a lot of “high” laborers in Minny because they can’t discipline them for it.

"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject." -Sir Winston Churchill

by propheteer on Sep 11, 2009 2:06 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Oh come on.

The law is that you can’t be punished if you’re tested for a chemical that it is not a crime to have. An equivalent would be if you went in to work, and after a blood or urine test, they fired you finding a high level of caffeine in your system. If they found you coming to work intoxicated or under the influence of illegal drugs, you can still be fired.

In regards to the inequities, there is no law that would protect the workers as such in Louisiana. After this it delves into State vs State, State vs Federal, and other areas where I am woefully lacking in knowledge to defend the position.

When you go to somebody's house, you don't crap on their floor. Being a fan of one team does NOT give you license to be a dick to fans of another.

Corollary: When people are visiting your house and behaving themselves, them being a fan of a different team is NOT a reason for you to piss in their beer.

by Robert Rence on Sep 11, 2009 2:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Mostly joking

but someone can still be “high” at work without it being legal. What about alcohol, codeine, or vicodin? I’m sure some hot-shot attorney could make a lawsuit work based on the fact an employee can’t be punished on their first offense. Regardless of how the law is interpreted, it’s still kind of backwards.

"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject." -Sir Winston Churchill

by propheteer on Sep 11, 2009 3:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

er...illegal

"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject." -Sir Winston Churchill

by propheteer on Sep 11, 2009 4:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

good

if the bears do beat the vikes this year i want it to be against these two biggens. hope we kick their ass up and down the field with all their guys available.

by reefermadness3 on Sep 11, 2009 2:18 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

i say

everyone should just keep calling them both fatty mcfatsies, thus making them more self conscious about their weight. this will undoubtedly make them go back on StarCaps to lose weight and once again get caught. itll be a “fool them twice, shame on them” type of thing. foolproof.

by BearockWay on Sep 11, 2009 4:44 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I'd just like to say one thing...

Doesn’t the NFL put out an approved supplements list every year to avoid exactly this kind of thing?

by Sklz711 on Sep 11, 2009 5:01 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Yep

That’s my argument as well, but because MN has a specific law on the state books, it doesn’t matter what the NFL wants or what the contract says, any accused employee has the right to explain the situation before any action can be taken.

The only part that I think is in the NFL’s favor is that they aren’t actually being accused of using ’roids, but rather having a masking agent in their systems. For the record, the NFL did warn about the use of StarCaps in 2006.

by Virto on Sep 11, 2009 6:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Fat Boys Are Just Buying Time.

Nice legal manuvering but in the end they will serve their 4 game suspension. My money is on the NFL.

by Gesiakob on Sep 11, 2009 5:40 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Apparently

They’ve been told they won’t be suspended this year, just because there’s almost no chance of a court date being met during the 2009 season.

The NFL can still appeal the current ruling, which would delay a date even longer if they were to lose the appeal.

by Virto on Sep 11, 2009 6:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

They could still lose some of their first four games

Let’s stop pretending Favre is some sort of demi-god who isn’t older than he was last season. Minnesota almost lost to Detroit twice last season, who’s to say that a better Detroit team won’t beat them this time, even with the cheating Williamses there?

And you know Mangini wants nothing more than to embarrass Favre for singlehandedly getting him fired.

Here’s hoping Cleveland pulls one out tomorrow.

"We're only gonna score 17 points? Hah hah" - some clown.

by ES46NE10 on Sep 12, 2009 1:45 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs