Steroids Dealer Provides the N.F.L. With Evidence (Updated - Found Dead)

**NodakPaul** · 06-06-2008, 10:52 AM

"cajunvike" wrote:

Specter???
Isn't cleaning up the NFL the job for the COMMISSIONER?
Besides, EVERYONE KNOWS that the NFL is covering up the steriods issue, just like MLB did...and continues to do.
This lack of investigation into steroids is simply more "business as usual" for the NFL, exposed by Goodell's coverup in the Spygate I matter and continued on with the steroids issue.
So, yes, it is all just one big coverup after another, all in the name of money.

You didn't have any problem with Specter coming in for SpyGate.
So it is OK for a senator to get involved - but only if it involves the Patriots??

**cajunvike** · 06-06-2008, 11:24 AM

"NodakPaul" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

Specter???
Isn't cleaning up the NFL the job for the COMMISSIONER?
Besides, EVERYONE KNOWS that the NFL is covering up the steriods issue, just like MLB did...and continues to do.
This lack of investigation into steroids is simply more "business as usual" for the NFL, exposed by Goodell's coverup in the Spygate I matter and continued on with the steroids issue.
So, yes, it is all just one big coverup after another, all in the name of money.

You didn't have any problem with Specter coming in for SpyGate.
So it is OK for a senator to get involved - but only if it involves the Patriots??

Nah, Specter is more than welcome to come in for the Steroids issue...but I doubt that Goodell wants him exposing even more of the sweeping under the rug antics that the Commissioner has already exhibited.
I welcome a full investigation of the steriods issue (but not like the pathetic piecemeal one conducted by Red Sox director George Mitchell and Bud Selig, which was a joke).

Bring it all on...and no destruction of evidence like in the Spygate I scandal.
Us fans deserve to see ALL of the evidence in any steriods investigation.

**C Mac D** · 06-06-2008, 11:40 AM

"cajunvike" wrote:

"NodakPaul" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

Specter???
Isn't cleaning up the NFL the job for the COMMISSIONER?
Besides, EVERYONE KNOWS that the NFL is covering up the steriods issue, just like MLB did...and continues to do.
This lack of investigation into steroids is simply more "business as usual" for the NFL, exposed by Goodell's coverup in the Spygate I matter and continued on with the steroids issue.
So, yes, it is all just one big coverup after another, all in the name of money.

You didn't have any problem with Specter coming in for SpyGate.
So it is OK for a senator to get involved - but only if it involves the Patriots??

Nah, Specter is more than welcome to come in for the Steroids issue...but I doubt that Goodell wants him exposing even more of the sweeping under the rug antics that the Commissioner has already exhibited.
I welcome a full investigation of the steriods issue (but not like the pathetic piecemeal one conducted by Red Sox director George Mitchell and Bud Selig, which was a joke).

Bring it all on...and no destruction of evidence like in the Spygate I scandal.
Us fans deserve to see ALL of the evidence in any steriods investigation.

Amen... but I think these go even beyond the NFL, and I don't care who calls me a "conspiracy theorist."

**NodakPaul** · 06-06-2008, 11:48 AM

I think the difference between MLB and the NFL in regards to steroid use is that MLB more or less embraced steroid use because the performances of players created story lines which drew back fans after the Strike.
Without that, MLB would have been in the situation that the NHL is in right now.
It was so widespread and out of control that a congressional investigation may have been the only way of stopping it.

In the NFL however, there is at least a semblance of testing as well as rather sever punishments for players caught using performance enhancing drugs.
A first time violation and the player is suspended for 1/4 of the season.
I'd like to see a baseball player suspended for 40 games if he tested positive (of course, they would have to actually test players for that to happen).

Is the NFL's policy enough to stop the steroid use? No.
Is it as bad as MLB's was? No.

I would rather see the commish and the NFLPA take a stance against steroid use than see a senator with an agenda start up a congressional investigation.

**cajunvike** · 06-06-2008, 12:02 PM

"NodakPaul" wrote:

I think the difference between MLB and the NFL in regards to steroid use is that MLB more or less embraced steroid use because the performances of players created story lines which drew back fans after the Strike.
Without that, MLB would have been in the situation that the NHL is in right now.
It was so widespread and out of control that a congressional investigation may have been the only way of stopping it.

In the NFL however, there is at least a semblance of testing as well as rather sever punishments for players caught using performance enhancing drugs.
A first time violation and the player is suspended for 1/4 of the season.
I'd like to see a baseball player suspended for 40 games if he tested positive (of course, they would have to actually test players for that to happen).

Is the NFL's policy enough to stop the steroid use? No.
Is it as bad as MLB's was? No.

I would rather see the commish and the NFLPA take a stance against steroid use than see a senator with an agenda start up a congressional investigation.

Congress wouldn't feel the need to step in if in-house "investigations" by both MLB and the NFL hadn't been bungled so badly.
Remember, the NFL had to screw it up before the opening was created for Specter to step in.

**NodakPaul** · 06-07-2008, 07:49 AM

"cajunvike" wrote:

"NodakPaul" wrote:

I think the difference between MLB and the NFL in regards to steroid use is that MLB more or less embraced steroid use because the performances of players created story lines which drew back fans after the Strike.
Without that, MLB would have been in the situation that the NHL is in right now.
It was so widespread and out of control that a congressional investigation may have been the only way of stopping it.

In the NFL however, there is at least a semblance of testing as well as rather sever punishments for players caught using performance enhancing drugs.
A first time violation and the player is suspended for 1/4 of the season.
I'd like to see a baseball player suspended for 40 games if he tested positive (of course, they would have to actually test players for that to happen).

Is the NFL's policy enough to stop the steroid use? No.
Is it as bad as MLB's was? No.

I would rather see the commish and the NFLPA take a stance against steroid use than see a senator with an agenda start up a congressional investigation.

Congress wouldn't feel the need to step in if in-house "investigations" by both MLB and the NFL hadn't been bungled so badly.
Remember, the NFL had to screw it up before the opening was created for Specter to step in.

Whether or not you think the NFL "screwed it up" has a lot a to do with whether or not you hate the Patriots.
Specter was looking for a chance to grandstand, that's all.

EDIT: And for the record, "Congress" doesn't see the need to step in.
Specter is pretty much on his own here.
Again, grandstanding.

**singersp** · 06-07-2008, 09:12 AM

"NodakPaul" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

"NodakPaul" wrote:

I think the difference between MLB and the NFL in regards to steroid use is that MLB more or less embraced steroid use because the performances of players created story lines which drew back fans after the Strike.
Without that, MLB would have been in the situation that the NHL is in right now.
It was so widespread and out of control that a congressional investigation may have been the only way of stopping it.

In the NFL however, there is at least a semblance of testing as well as rather sever punishments for players caught using performance enhancing drugs.
A first time violation and the player is suspended for 1/4 of the season.
I'd like to see a baseball player suspended for 40 games if he tested positive (of course, they would have to actually test players for that to happen).

Is the NFL's policy enough to stop the steroid use? No.
Is it as bad as MLB's was? No.

I would rather see the commish and the NFLPA take a stance against steroid use than see a senator with an agenda start up a congressional investigation.

Congress wouldn't feel the need to step in if in-house "investigations" by both MLB and the NFL hadn't been bungled so badly.
Remember, the NFL had to screw it up before the opening was created for Specter to step in.

Whether or not you think the NFL "screwed it up" has a lot a to do with whether or not you hate the Patriots.
Specter was looking for a chance to grandstand, that's all.

EDIT: And for the record, "Congress" doesn't see the need to step in.
Specter is pretty much on his own here.
Again, grandstanding.

And he's not done yet.......

[size=13pt]Sen. Specter calls for independent investigation into Spygate[/size]

**NodakPaul** · 06-07-2008, 09:23 AM

"singersp" wrote:

"NodakPaul" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

"NodakPaul" wrote:

I think the difference between MLB and the NFL in regards to steroid use is that MLB more or less embraced steroid use because the performances of players created story lines which drew back fans after the Strike.
Without that, MLB would have been in the situation that the NHL is in right now.
It was so widespread and out of control that a congressional investigation may have been the only way of stopping it.

In the NFL however, there is at least a semblance of testing as well as rather sever punishments for players caught using performance enhancing drugs.
A first time violation and the player is suspended for 1/4 of the season.
I'd like to see a baseball player suspended for 40 games if he tested positive (of course, they would have to actually test players for that to happen).

Is the NFL's policy enough to stop the steroid use? No.
Is it as bad as MLB's was? No.

I would rather see the commish and the NFLPA take a stance against steroid use than see a senator with an agenda start up a congressional investigation.

Congress wouldn't feel the need to step in if in-house "investigations" by both MLB and the NFL hadn't been bungled so badly.
Remember, the NFL had to screw it up before the opening was created for Specter to step in.

Whether or not you think the NFL "screwed it up" has a lot a to do with whether or not you hate the Patriots.
Specter was looking for a chance to grandstand, that's all.

EDIT: And for the record, "Congress" doesn't see the need to step in.
Specter is pretty much on his own here.
Again, grandstanding.

And he's not done yet.......

[size=13pt]Sen. Specter calls for independent investigation into Spygate[/size]

Yeah, I saw that on PFT.
http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/06/06/specter-not-done-with-spygate/

...that means that there are two possibilities: Either Specter convinces his colleagues in Washington to join him in holding hearings, or the Spygate issue is over.

I think that the latter is more likely.

**singersp** · 06-07-2008, 04:59 PM

[size=13pt]Police say steroid dealer killed himself[/size]

Sporting News

Posted: June 6, 2008

DALLAS (AP) -- Authorities said Friday that a convicted steroids dealer who claimed to have sold drugs to pro football players killed himself, and the mother of a woman found dead in his home said she believes he killed her, too....

**singersp** · 06-07-2008, 05:06 PM

"singersp" wrote:

[size=13pt]Police say steroid dealer killed himself[/size]

Sporting News

Posted: June 6, 2008

Suicide? Hmmm, I really wonder.

Men wearing ski masks and jackets marked "police" were seen entering the home late Thursday morning & that evening both are found dead. It doesn't sound like suicide to me, especially when he was shot in the abdomen first.

Who shoots themselves in the belly 1st & then the head to commit suicide?

Something fishy is going on here. Someone wanted this to look like a murder suicide IMO.