Clay Matthews linked to painkiller

[Half Empty]

OK. Releasing both Matthews and Peppers would result in $13,550,000 in cap savings. Why not do that, regardless of any drug allegations? That's the logical conclusion to draw from this piece.

If you release them, they're off the team for good, if I understand that term correctly. If I understand the writer of the article correctly , he's saying Matthews is necessary, just not for the entire season, and Peppers is great to have around for smaller stretches than before. Your logical conclusion and mine are obviously quite different - my reason for referring the article is to show that early season suspensions might not be a dagger.

 

[GBkrzygrl]

I just heard on another forum that the players have agreed to the interviews and that Harrison is flying to GB to do his.

Can anyone confirm that?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The League doesn't think it is overstepping their boundaries and will suspend the players and this will end up in court, with bad results for the players. Again, see Brady. The NFL had no clear evidence against Brady and beat him down like a dog. The judges looked at the CBA which made Goodell, judge, jury, and executioner. The same applies here. These players will get suspended for not cooperating and this will have nothing to do with PEDs in the end. It will have to do with the power the CBA gave Goodell. According to the CBA, (and the appeal judges) Goodell has the right to call these players in for an interview and can punish players that don't cooperate.

This is a different story than the NFL suspending Brady though as there's a policy included in the CBA that regulates the league's power regarding PED use.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I just heard on another forum that the players have agreed to the interviews and that Harrison is flying to GB to do his.

Can anyone confirm that?

I don't know about Harrison flying to Green Bay to be interviewed but as I've posted earlier in this thread it seems Matthews and Peppers have agreed to talk to the league about the report.

 

[JK64]

This is a different story than the NFL suspending Brady though as there's a policy included in the CBA that regulates the league's power regarding PED use.

It's not about PED use if the players don't comply to the commissioner. It is about PED use if the players do interview and get suspended for PED use.

 

[GBkrzygrl]

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/...meet-nfl-discuss-reported-steroid-allegations

Looks like they are going to comply.

 

[PikeBadger]

Why? I mean, if we lost them for the entire season, probably, but hypothetically, if they were out for say, 8 games, Datone has some possible upside, Perry is back, you've got Fackrell now and Elliott could be at least passable.

Definitely wouldn't be ideal but I think we could skate by for awhile and at least give ourselves a chance. There's some depth there.

So much depth apparently that some here don't think we'll be able to re-sign any of them because others will offer them all big money in free agency. For the record, I don't see the situation that way.

I don't think it would be a catastrophic loss to go without Peppers and Matthews for 4 games. Certainly not an ideal situation though. Would make final roster cutdowns easier though. Suspended players don't count as roster spots, is that correct?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

It's not about PED use if the players don't comply to the commissioner. It is about PED use if the players do interview and get suspended for PED use.

I'm quite sure players being accused of having used performance enhancing drugs should be handled under the PED policy.

Suspended players don't count as roster spots, is that correct?

That's true. I'm surprised several posters assume the Packers could get by without the team's two best pass rushers for an extended period though.

 

[JK64]

I'm quite sure players being accused of having used performance enhancing drugs should be handled under the PED policy.

Sure, as long as they comply with the commissioner. If they don't comply with the commissioner it becomes two violations.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Sure, as long as they comply with the commissioner. If they don't comply with the commissioner it becomes two violations.

The PED policy doesn't allow the commissioner to compel players to agree to an interview because of rumors though.

 

[JK64]

The PED policy doesn't allow the commissioner to compel players to agree to an interview because of rumors though.

The CBA sure does or so says the U.S court of appeals.

 

[Mondio]

The CBA sure does or so says the U.S court of appeals.

one court said yes, one said no, had Brady continued, they may have ended it in his favor. If they NFLPA and the players wanted to stand up, they very well could have won this one too. It appears they decided this wasn't the time to make a stand. We'll see what happens if the NFL asks for more than just the answers to a couple questions.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The CBA sure does or so says the U.S court of appeals.

It should be pretty obvious to everyone that the PED policy doesn't regulate the proper psi level of a football.

 

[PackerDNA]

I just heard on another forum that the players have agreed to the interviews and that Harrison is flying to GB to do his.

Can anyone confirm that?

cbssports.com is reporting all 3 (minus Neal, who has not agreed) have agreed to interview with the league.

 

[JK64]

one court said yes, one said no, had Brady continued, they may have ended it in his favor. If they NFLPA and the players wanted to stand up, they very well could have won this one too. It appears they decided this wasn't the time to make a stand. We'll see what happens if the NFL asks for more than just the answers to a couple questions.

The next stop would have been all the way to the Supreme Court and the writing was on the wall. The supreme court handles maybe 60-70 cases in a year. I doubt Brady's case or Peterson's case would have been allowed to be heard. There were two decisions against Brady, the last two. The judges determined that the language in the CBA allowed Goodell to be judge, jury and executioner.

 

[JK64]

It should be pretty obvious to everyone that the PED policy doesn't regulate the proper psi level of a football.

Brady's court cases had nothing to do with PSI, they were about if Goodell had the right to suspend him for 4 games. The language the judges used referred to the CBA and the power given to Goodell. There was NOTHING mentioned about air pressure. Remember, Brady did not cooperate much, in fact he lawyered up and smashed his cell phone. After that, came the 4 game suspension.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Brady's court cases had nothing to do with PSI, they were about if Goodell had the right to suspend him for 4 games. The language the judges used referred to the CBA and the power given to Goodell. There was NOTHING mentioned about air pressure. Remember, Brady did not cooperate much, in fact he lawyered up and smashed his cell phone. After that, came the 4 game suspension.

That's because the CBA doesn't include a policy about air pressure, so Goodell had the chance to suspend Brady based on conduct detrimental to the league.

Use of performance enhancing drugs should be regulated solely by the CBA's PED policy though.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

cbssports.com is reporting all 3 (minus Neal, who has not agreed) have agreed to interview with the league.

It appears and sounds like Neal may be the sacrificial lamb here by the NFLPA......they may want to see what actions the NFL will take against him if he doesn't comply.

Purely speculation, but since Neal is currently unemployed, kind of a smart move on the NFLPA's part......wonder if Neal will get some compensation out of this! lol

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...l-for-public-shaming-and-bullying-of-players/

 

[HardRightEdge]

According to ESPN's Chris Mortensen Matthews and Peppers have agreed to meet with league investigators about PED report.

Good. Harrison too. Evidently this is with the blessing of the NFLPA, not the players breaking ranks, which is a good thing. Neal declined, which puts him in an awkward position.

Now the outcome depends on what the NFL investigators discovered and whether Matthews and Peppers have persuasive answers to their questions. They're not out of the woods yet.

 

[adambr2]

That's true. I'm surprised several posters assume the Packers could get by without the team's two best pass rushers for an extended period though.

Well, I guess that depends what you mean by extended period and what you mean by getting by. I threw out just a hypothetical 8 game, half season suspension earlier. That includes home games against Detroit, the Giants, Cowboys, Bears, and Colts. Road games at Jacksonville, Minnesota, and Atlanta. Do I think it's realistic that they could squeak out a 5-3 record over that stretch, or at worst 4-4 and still in the hunt? Yes.

Now if they were out the whole season, I think a playoff berth becomes questionable and an early playoff exit becomes likely.

Obviously if we were looking at 4 games I'd be pretty optimistic about it. I might even go as far to say they might be fresher late in the season for it (not arguing that a suspension would be a good thing, just pointing it out.)

 

[HardRightEdge]

Use of performance enhancing drugs should be regulated solely by the CBA's PED policy though.

You may think it should, but it doesn't. In considering the following provisions of the "Personal Conduct Policy" agreed to by the NFLPA which contains the "conduct detrimental" provisions, the league's authority to act as they have in this case is spelled out in black and white :

https://nflpaweb.blob.core.windows.net/media/Default/PDFs/Active Players/PersonalConductPolicy2015.pdf

Prohibited conduct includes, "possession, use, or distribution of steroids or other performance enhancing substances".

Further, "Whenever the league office becomes aware of a possible violation of the Personal Conduct Policy, it will undertake an investigation...."

Further yet, and this is the kicker, "League and team employees are required to cooperate in any such investigation and are obligated to be fully responsive and truthful in responding to requests from investigators for information (testimony, documents, physical evidence, or other information) that may bear on whether the Policy has been violated. A failure to cooperate with an investigation or to be truthful in responding to inquiries will be separate grounds for disciplinary action."

Regardless of the cases at hand, there does need to be an investigative and disciplinary mechanism to address suspicions of performance enhancing drug use, even if they are legally acquired and are not detected in any test under the regime. Whether the NFLPA should have agreed to allow those powers to reside in the NFL office can be debated, but that PED discipline should be limited exclusively to positive drug tests would be a weak PED program.

 

[HardRightEdge]

If you release them, they're off the team for good, if I understand that term correctly. If I understand the writer of the article correctly , he's saying Matthews is necessary, just not for the entire season, and Peppers is great to have around for smaller stretches than before. Your logical conclusion and mine are obviously quite different - my reason for referring the article is to show that early season suspensions might not be a dagger.

Oh, no, the writer cited several cases of the team performing well without Matthews. And Peppers is being paid to sit on the bench behind Perry, as he would have you believe, and is of little consequence. So just get rid of them altogether, if that's the case, and use the savings to sign players that actually matter.

 

[Poppa San]

So just get rid of them altogether, if that's the case, and use the savings to sign players that actually matter.

Like the kicker, or the backup RB, or maybe the #8/9 OL. [pick that scab]

 

[adambr2]

I interpret it as nothing more than examples that teams can survive without key players in short stretches, especially with the right amount of depth. I certainly wouldn't read into it any more than that and certainly don't think either is less valuable than Perry.

Other than the QB, I'd say that's generally true. Heck, we were 6-0 without Nelson last year, but in the long run, not having him sure hurt.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Like the kicker, or the backup RB, or maybe the #8/9 OL. [pick that scab]

Fire Capers.

I assume you realize I was being sarcastic, pointing out the bad analysis in that piece.

Just because somebody is paid to write stuff doesn't mean it's worth reading.