Mathews, Harrison and Peppers facing suspension

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Tuckdaddy

He wants to see them concerning a PED matter that a report brought them up in. How is that kissing the ring?

Is your butt hurt over Brady so great that you think employees should just ignore what the head honcho says? It's just an interview and if they don't want to they can retire.

Let me guess, OSHA sucks, the Department of Labor sucks, all labor laws suck, and the DOL, and probably the EPA too, should be abolished? Companies should be able to do what they want. They're paying you, after all....

[Dave Lane]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

Let me guess, OSHA sucks, the Department of Labor sucks, all labor laws suck, and the DOL, and probably the EPA too, should be abolished? Companies should be able to do what they want. They're paying you, after all....

When arguing with a complete idiot, I find it best to find something else to do instead. In the end he will pull you down to his level and win with experience.

[Red Dawg]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

Let me guess, OSHA sucks, the Department of Labor sucks, all labor laws suck, and the DOL, and probably the EPA too, should be abolished? Companies should be able to do what they want. They're paying you, after all....

I am not picking a side. I am talking about reality of being in the work force and how the players think that they are above what they agreed to in the CBA.

If the boss, CEO or owner wants to speak to you about an issue then you will either have the conversation, be canned or you can quit. That is life anywhere you go. Successful players have big ego's and simply don't like being treated like workers but at the end of the day, that's what they are, employees of a multi billion dollar company that will answer to the man.

Fair of unfair that is what happens and they may as well just live with it and comply because it's not going change any time soon. None of them will quit that's for sure because their ego won't allow them to go out like that.

Brady could have easily walked away on his principals. He's a legend with 4 rings no matter happened but he didn't and these guys won't either. He lost a so will they. Give the interviews and move on and unless they have a hot drug test nothing will happen. If your clean then they have nothing to fear.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Tuckdaddy

I am not picking a side. I am talking about reality of being in the work force and how the players think that they are above what they agreed to in the CBA.

If the boss, CEO or owner wants to speak to you about an issue then you will either have the conversation, be canned or you can quit. That is life anywhere you go. Successful players have big ego's and simply don't like being treated like workers but at the end of the day, that's what they are, employees of a multi billion dollar company that will answer to the man.

Fair of unfair that is what happens and they may as well just live with it and comply because it's not going change any time soon. None of them will quit that's for sure because their ego won't allow them to go out like that.

Brady could have easily walked away on his principals. He's a legend with 4 rings no matter happened but he didn't and these guys won't either. He lost a so will they. Give the interviews and move on and unless they have a hot drug test nothing will happen. If your clean then they have nothing to fear.

Yeah, that last bit is demonstrably not true.

But let's get back to what matters. Here's the thing -- the PED program is spelled out in the CBA. It contains all kinds of stuff about urine testing etc. Now, the NFL wants players to answer questions about PEDs. That's not in the CBA. They want NFL players to potentially give incriminating evidence in a way that is not in the CBA.

What if the NFL suddenly wanted players to sign affidavits, under oath, swearing that they have not taken any illegal substance since the last drug test. That ok?

Well, it shouldn't be. The CBA doesn't say anything about that. But now, under Article 46, perhaps refusal to give affirmative evidence exonerating yourself is enough to establish reasonable belief that you did take illegal substances, so now you're penalized not under the PED policy (because you didn't violate that in a way that can be established under the PED policy) but rather under Article 46.

Oh, and it's conduct detrimental, and Herr Kommmissar wants compliance, so it's an automatic one year suspension.

Done and done. Don't like it, too ****ing bad. Not in teh CBA? Too ****ing bad. That's what Herr Kommissar wants today, so that is what he shall get.

Life under Zie Kommissar.

You know what this looks to the NFLPA, which spent all that time and money negotiating a PED policy with the NFL?

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Tuckdaddy

I am not picking a side. I am talking about reality of being in the work force and how the players think that they are above what they agreed to in the CBA.

This is absolutely nonsensical. There is a long, detailed PED policy in the CBA, which doesn't include anything about having to go before anyone to disprove an allegation that was made then withdrawn.