Should Merriman be a probowler? - Page 5

GROB · 12-22-2006, 02:04 PM

Roid boy was suspended this year for 4 games, should he of made the probowl?

Mr. Laz · 12-22-2006, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

I seriously doubt it.....

NFLPA is one of the more accommodating players "union" there is.

that's how the league got this many fines etc already.

Drunk · 12-22-2006, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oh Snap

Its funny how a football athelete who is known for maticuously takeing care of his bodys doesnt even know what is going into his protien shakes!...

The "protein shakes" =) industry is not as regulated as you may think.

(joke)

penchief · 12-22-2006, 05:17 PM

If he did the crime, then paid the time, and is still sublime.....

Then I think his nomination is fine

In fact, it's grandeur

-Johnnie Cochran
aka/ Walt Frazier

Drunk · 12-22-2006, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halfcan

Lucky, the details of you being a Moron for believing such shit-is not sketchy at all.

Ya, and I bet you believe everything George Bush tells you too huh.

Please lets not get politics involved Drunk! It only complicates matters further. Ok.
=)

**morphius** · 12-22-2006, 05:25 PM

I would say no, not because of his play, but because testing positive should exclude you, accident or not.

Now Welborn has played at that level, not even last year, but the same would hold for him as well.

Honestly the players union or the NFL should step up here, a player should be able to take whatever supplement he wants to take and have them test it. They should not release what they are taking, to the public or to other players. Then the NFL/Players union can have the drugs delivered to them, tested and sent to the player. Even if they don't test every sample they can keep some of that bottle on hand and test to see if it is tainted.

This would give players that feeling of having an advantage by getting to chose their own supplements without the other players finding out what they are taking, all while protecting the player.

Oh well.

penchief · 12-22-2006, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by morphius

I would say no, not because of his play, but because testing positive should exclude you, accident or not.

Now Welborn has played at that level, not even last year, but the same would hold for him as well.

Honestly the players union or the NFL should step up here, a player should be able to take whatever supplement he wants to take and have them test it. They should not release what they are taking, to the public or to other players. Then the NFL/Players union can have the drugs delivered to them, tested and sent to the player. Even if they don't test every sample they can keep some of that bottle on hand and test to see if it is tainted.

This would give players that feeling of having an advantage by getting to chose their own supplements without the other players finding out what they are taking, all while protecting the player.

Oh well.

All good points. Now I regret the timing of my rhyming.

Drunk · 12-22-2006, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by morphius

I would say no, not because of his play, but because testing positive should exclude you, accident or not.

Now Welborn has played at that level, not even last year, but the same would hold for him as well.

Honestly the players union or the NFL should step up here, a player should be able to take whatever supplement he wants to take and have them test it. They should not release what they are taking, to the public or to other players. Then the NFL/Players union can have the drugs delivered to them, tested and sent to the player. Even if they don't test every sample they can keep some of that bottle on hand and test to see if it is tainted.

This would give players that feeling of having an advantage by getting to chose their own supplements without the other players finding out what they are taking, all while protecting the player.

Oh well.

That wouldnt work, because you can test a supplement 50 times and have it come out negative but 51 is positive. Then what.

Now, to exclude a player after having a positive test (no matter if it was accident or not) is a good argument. I have to go against it here because he is a charger and its my job as a fanatic is to back him. =)

**morphius** · 12-22-2006, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drunk

That wouldnt work, because you can test a supplement 50 times and have it come out negative but 51 is positive. Then what.

Now, to exclude a player after having a positive test (no matter if it was accident or not) is a good argument. I have to go against it here because he is a charger and its my job as a fanatic is to back him. =)

But what are the chances that it would be just two pills from the bottle? You would think the entire drug bottle would be tainted, and if the NFL has some pills from that bottle they could then test it to verify that is truly what happened. If it was the drug then that supplement company could be banned and the player wouldn't need to be punished.

Sure it wouldn't be perfect, but if a company knew that it was going to the NFL they would make damn sure not to put anything in it that would get them banned.

Sure it isn't perfect, and it would cost money, but hey, they pay to take all the samples from players now.

Eleazar · 12-22-2006, 06:54 PM

You shouldn't be able to make the pro bowl in a season in which you serve a suspension.

KurtCobain · 12-22-2006, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hootie

COULD YOU IMAGINE HUARD ON ROIDS?! JESUS.

THEN WE WONT NEED LJ!!! yay money saving! woo!

KurtCobain · 12-22-2006, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cochise

You shouldn't be able to make the pro bowl in a season in which you serve a suspension.

I agree.

TN_Chief · 12-22-2006, 07:24 PM

IMO, if you're suspended by the league you should be ineligible for the Pro Bowl.

For those of you doing the "tainted supplements" dance...bullshit. First of all, the league has a list of approved (read: tested) supplements that are known to be free of any banned substances. Players with half a brain use them. Second, supplement companies don't make money by spiking their cheap-to-make-but-sold-at-an-insane-markup products with expensive and illegal drugs. Those claims (always by an athlete that's tested positive) have been shown time and again to be utter bullshit. The government coming in and shutting you down hurts profits. Third, if you understood how athletes are tested for drugs (T/E ratio), you'd know that the chances of the mythical "tainted supplement" resulting in a positive drug test are precisely zero (playing make-believe...a "tainted" supplement would have to have a sky-high level of "taint" to trigger a positive test).

I believe that currently the NFL's allowed T/E ratio is 5:1. That means they can have 5 times the normal amount of testosterone in their body before being considered positive for using gear. Athletes that use simply monitor their blood (with a physician's help) to float just under that threshold.

What this means is that a lot of guys (most?) who test clean are in fact using. They're just very smart about it. Look at the size, speed and musculature of today's NFL player. You think that's natural? Please.

JonesCrusher · 12-22-2006, 08:22 PM

Nkay

Hootie · 12-22-2006, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc

I don't know, but Hootie has earned her way to ignore. Christ.

where did this 'her' myth come from!?

Is it because I talk about blowing dudes all of the time?!

Hootie · 12-22-2006, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC

Agreed 110%. I would love for the roids to end up in our players, couldnt hurt...

Couldn you imagine Huard on Roids? Good Lord, his passes would rip WR's arms off.....

I already used the Huard on roids theory in this thread, copy-cat...

View Poll Results: Should roid boy be a probowler?
yes	17	22.08%
no	60	77.92%
Voters: 77. You may not vote on this poll

12-22-2006, 02:04 PM
GROB Banned Join Date: Sep 2004 Casino cash: $9854900	Should Merriman be a probowler? Roid boy was suspended this year for 4 games, should he of made the probowl?
Posts: 422

12-22-2006, 05:17 PM	#63
penchief MVP Join Date: Feb 2003 Casino cash: $6085286	If he did the crime, then paid the time, and is still sublime..... Then I think his nomination is fine In fact, it's grandeur -Johnnie Cochran aka/ Walt Frazier
Posts: 17,045

12-22-2006, 05:25 PM	#65
morphius World's finest morphius Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $5725027	I would say no, not because of his play, but because testing positive should exclude you, accident or not. Now Welborn has played at that level, not even last year, but the same would hold for him as well. Honestly the players union or the NFL should step up here, a player should be able to take whatever supplement he wants to take and have them test it. They should not release what they are taking, to the public or to other players. Then the NFL/Players union can have the drugs delivered to them, tested and sent to the player. Even if they don't test every sample they can keep some of that bottle on hand and test to see if it is tainted. This would give players that feeling of having an advantage by getting to chose their own supplements without the other players finding out what they are taking, all while protecting the player. Oh well.
Posts: 26,023

12-22-2006, 06:54 PM	#69
Eleazar Beyond the Rapids Join Date: May 2003 Location: Langley, VA Casino cash: $-370000	You shouldn't be able to make the pro bowl in a season in which you serve a suspension.
Posts: 80,659

12-22-2006, 07:24 PM	#72
TN_Chief Herm Edwards is...Kim Jong-il Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Eden Prairie, MN Casino cash: $10004900	IMO, if you're suspended by the league you should be ineligible for the Pro Bowl. For those of you doing the "tainted supplements" dance...bullshit. First of all, the league has a list of approved (read: tested) supplements that are known to be free of any banned substances. Players with half a brain use them. Second, supplement companies don't make money by spiking their cheap-to-make-but-sold-at-an-insane-markup products with expensive and illegal drugs. Those claims (always by an athlete that's tested positive) have been shown time and again to be utter bullshit. The government coming in and shutting you down hurts profits. Third, if you understood how athletes are tested for drugs (T/E ratio), you'd know that the chances of the mythical "tainted supplement" resulting in a positive drug test are precisely zero (playing make-believe...a "tainted" supplement would have to have a sky-high level of "taint" to trigger a positive test). I believe that currently the NFL's allowed T/E ratio is 5:1. That means they can have 5 times the normal amount of testosterone in their body before being considered positive for using gear. Athletes that use simply monitor their blood (with a physician's help) to float just under that threshold. What this means is that a lot of guys (most?) who test clean are in fact using. They're just very smart about it. Look at the size, speed and musculature of today's NFL player. You think that's natural? Please.
Posts: 1,049

12-22-2006, 08:22 PM	#73
JonesCrusher Knock Knock Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Southeast Wisconsin Casino cash: $10006550	Nkay
Posts: 771