Skip to content

Williams Wall cleared to play while litigation is pending

NFL_williams.jpgIf quarterback Brett Favre joins the Vikings, he won’t have to worry about the team’s defense being diminished during the first four games of the 2009 regular season.

According to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, Hennepin County Circuit Judge Gary Larson has ruled that defensive tackles Kevin and Pat Williams can continue to play football while their state-court claims against the NFL are pending.

In May, the NFL scored a partial victory against the pair, with the dismissal of federal claims challenging the imposition of the suspensions.  But the federal court found that two claims arising under Minnesota state law could be pursued independently of the grievance procedure set forth in the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the league and the NFLPA.

Judge Larson, who’s not the same Gary Larsen who once played for the Vikings, also ruled that the NFL is not permitted to subject the players to enhanced testing that follows a positive result until the case is resolved.

A hearing will be held on July 22 regarding a request from the league to stay the state-court action pending the outcome of the NFL’s appeal of federal judge Paul Magnuson’s decision to permit the Minnesota statutory claims to survive.  If the league obtains a stay, there’s a chance that the state-court action would be rendered moot, if the federal appeals court finds that a Collective Bargaining Agreement governed by federal labor law supersedes claims arising under a state statute.

Bottom line?  The Williams Wall will stand tall to start the 2009 campaign, and there’s a good chance that their status won’t be finally resolved until after the coming season ends.

Maybe, in the end, the controversy will land on the desk of Minnesota Supreme Court Justice Alan Page, who is the same Alan Page who once played for the Vikings. 

Permalink 62 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Legal, Minnesota Vikings, Rumor Mill, Top Stories
62 Responses to “Williams Wall cleared to play while litigation is pending”
  1. Big Stretch says: Jul 9, 2009 11:40 AM

    if the Williams wall is not subject to suspension until their case is resolved, shouldn’t that be good news for Plax?

  2. hurls187 says: Jul 9, 2009 11:48 AM

    Circuit “Jude”? Where’s the cross-out and fix? That’s not his first name

  3. DCViking says: Jul 9, 2009 11:53 AM

    Bottom line? The Williams Wall will stand tall to start the 2009 campaign, and there’s a good chance that their status won’t be finally resolved until after the coming season ends.
    ————————————————
    Not necessarily — if the NFL wins the July 22nd hearing, the suspensions are in effect, correct?

  4. ZN0rseman says: Jul 9, 2009 11:54 AM

    The NFL is 100% in the wrong on this case, and they know it. They intentionally withheld information from the players that they knew would directly impact not only their livelihood, bu their health. In addition, the NFL was very selective about which teams were to be penalized, targeting only small market teams. They also know that, even with their army of lawyers, they don’t stand a chance if the case falls into the lap of Alan Page, a former NFL player who knows exactly how corrupt and ruthless the people running the NFL can be.
    I just can’t wait to see the large pile of money that leaves the NFL coffers when Pat and Kevin win their very large civil suit.
    “Revenge is a dish best served cold.”
    $0.02,
    –Z

  5. Viks_2010_CHAMPS!! says: Jul 9, 2009 11:58 AM

    Good call Big Stretch!!
    Florio, can you address that please. Does this decision set presidence for Plax or does it not because it was a State court decision?

  6. Tundrastruck says: Jul 9, 2009 11:59 AM

    That you point out that Page played for the Vikings and suggest it would have any impact on any opinion he issues points to the fact that even you admit that lawyers are less than interested in the letter of the law. I would add that Page played for the Bears, too…what then?

  7. Mike Florio says: Jul 9, 2009 11:59 AM

    @DCViking . . .
    if the NFL wins on july 22, it means only that there won’t be a trial in the state court case until the federal appeals court renders a decision as to whether the state claims should have been thrown out by the federal judge, and not sent back to minnesota.
    the NFL prefers to have a shot at getting the federal appeals court to throw out the whole case before having to spend time and money defending against the claims that would be moot if the league wins the federal appeal.

  8. MNRunLeft says: Jul 9, 2009 12:10 PM

    Did word ever come out to why Grady Jackson wasn’t suspended for testing positive for the same band substance?

  9. mbbrazi says: Jul 9, 2009 12:10 PM

    How ironic the law is candy floss or is it candy ass compared to the NFL. Where the law (courtrooms, lawyers and judges) are concerned they can literally let a man serve a month in jail and two months house arrest for drunk driving and killing a man coming home from work. They let another man run around free for carrying a pistol and shooting himself when they (New York) have the toughest gun law of the fifty states. But you get two lineman who are not going to lose weight unless they stop eating and the NFL tries to penalize them for taking a diet pill which the NFL itself couldn’t get it straight as to whether the pill is legitimate or illegitimate in the first place. The NFL needs to bite the bullet on this one, let it go and concentrate on dealing heavily with the real losers who are bringing the game down.

  10. Hungry N. Hadasnack says: Jul 9, 2009 12:11 PM

    Is it the same Gary Larsen who does The Far Side cartoon?
    Love that sh1t…
    About the Williams sisters:
    This potentially ISN’T good news for Vikes.
    Their first 5 games are:
    @ Cleveland
    @ Detroit
    home vs. 49ers
    home vs. Packers
    home vs. Rams
    Now tell me–is there a BETTER time during your schedule to miss the two biggest pieces of your defense?
    Why not get it over with when the schedule is easiest, when the Williams Walri will hardly be needed?
    Instead, they face the possibility of suspension later in the season, when they face scheduling stretches such as:
    Ravens
    @ Steelers
    @ GB
    or in the final 3 weeks:
    @ Panthers
    @ Bears
    Giants
    I think if the vikes don’t start the season AT LEAST 3-1, they’ll be lucky to make .500.
    That’s with or without the Walrus Sisters.
    No matter how you slice, Vikings will implode at some point during the season–it’s inevitable, you can almost set your watch by it.
    Either a hot start and an eventual collapse, or a slow start before a little late-season surge (too little, too late).
    Every year.
    Futlity.
    No wonder Minnesotans elected Stuart freakin’ Smalley to be the their next Senator–the Vikings need to be told they’re good enough, they’re smart enough, and doggone, people like them…
    (although not enough to sell out their playoff games, apparently).

  11. Hungry N. Hadasnack says: Jul 9, 2009 12:16 PM

    The league gives players an enormous, comprehensive list of APPROVED medicinal and dietary products/supplements, with the express warning to deviate only at YOUR OWN RISK.
    The fact is, the Fatty McFat-Fat Sisters strayed from the list, and they should be punished accordingly.

  12. Slim79 says: Jul 9, 2009 12:17 PM

    Both parties are in the wrong. The NFL should have told players what they knew regarding StarCaps and the players should have investigated the product they were using. This is a situation where they should just agree to something like a 2 game suspension and move on.

  13. Lou says: Jul 9, 2009 12:18 PM

    Is he the same Gary Larson from the “Far Side” ?

  14. alewatcher says: Jul 9, 2009 12:24 PM

    Those guys will be retired before this gets through all the appeals.

  15. Creeper says: Jul 9, 2009 12:43 PM

    The logical result if these guys win is ridiculous. It’d mean that any substance not explicitly on the banned list is fair game to use. We all know that there are new ‘supplements’ that hit the market all the time, so this would all but gut the PED ban that’s in the CBA.

  16. whatthehellisgoingonoutthere says: Jul 9, 2009 12:48 PM

    # ZN0rseman says: July 9, 2009 11:54 AM
    The NFL is 100% in the wrong on this case, and they know it. They intentionally withheld information from the players that they knew would directly impact not only their livelihood, bu their health. In addition, the NFL was very selective about which teams were to be penalized, targeting only small market teams. They also know that, even with their army of lawyers, they don’t stand a chance if the case falls into the lap of Alan Page, a former NFL player who knows exactly how corrupt and ruthless the people running the NFL can be.
    I just can’t wait to see the large pile of money that leaves the NFL coffers when Pat and Kevin win their very large civil suit.
    “Revenge is a dish best served cold.”
    $0.02,
    –Z
    —————————–
    You couldn’t be more wrong. As Florio pointed out months ago, the details of the lawsuit showed that not only did the NFL warn players about endorsing Star Caps, they also warned them about using it. This information was sent to all of the players agents, so blame them rather than the NFL.
    Even the Williams know that they don’t have a legit case. They are just grandstanding whiny players who think because they didn’t take steroids, they should be exonerated. How many other players have felt the same way when they tested for a banned substance that wasn’t necessarily steroids, but was either a masking agent or on the list under the same policy? It’s a pretty standard excuse, which is why the NFL went to such great lengths to remove that as an excuse.

  17. jimicos says: Jul 9, 2009 12:49 PM

    MNRunLeft says:
    July 9, 2009 12:10 PM
    Did word ever come out to why Grady Jackson wasn’t suspended for testing positive for the same band substance?
    ————————
    “Jackson, who signed a three-year, $8 million deal on March 4, is being counted on to shore up a run defense that ranked last in the NFL in 2008. But while he’ll be back on the field for training camp, it’s unclear if he’ll be available for the start of the season.
    He still faces a possible suspension for violating the league’s drug policy last season as one of several players who tested positive for a banned diuretic. Jackson’s individual case was deferred by the league last fall, and he filed a class-action lawsuit against the manufacturer of StarCaps, the dietary supplement later found to contain the NFL-banned drug Butemanide.
    But if his appeal isn’t upheld he could miss the first four games of the season. And that reality could be a factor in the current take-it-slow approach. ”
    http://www.detnews.com/article/20090624/SPORTS0101/906240381/1004/New-Lions-tackle-Grady-Jackson-has-yet-to-be-seen

  18. jimicos says: Jul 9, 2009 12:52 PM

    ZN0rseman says:
    July 9, 2009 11:54 AM
    The NFL is 100% in the wrong on this case, and they know it. They intentionally withheld information from the players that they knew would directly impact not only their livelihood, bu their health. In addition, the NFL was very selective about which teams were to be penalized, targeting only small market teams. They also know that, even with their army of lawyers, they don’t stand a chance if the case falls into the lap of Alan Page, a former NFL player who knows exactly how corrupt and ruthless the people running the NFL can be.
    I just can’t wait to see the large pile of money that leaves the NFL coffers when Pat and Kevin win their very large civil suit.
    “Revenge is a dish best served cold.”
    $0.02,
    –Z
    ——————————-
    How many times do we need to rehash the same facts? The NFL was under NO OBLIGATION to reveal what they knew about StarCaps. As I’ve said multiple times, if they had made it known that StarCaps contained Bumetanide, the assumption would be that they were testing all supplements and that the league would publish a list of spiked products.
    You know it, I know it, we all know it. The league didn’t take that step to announce what they knew because they knew they’d be expected to find all spiked supplements in the future.

  19. Razon says: Jul 9, 2009 1:10 PM

    @ZN0rseman
    Step away from the ledge, yes they picked out certain small market teams!! :rolleyes: Your post reads like a Viking “fan” post would read. Wait maybe I should take fan out of the quotes, it is still the off-season so I am sure you are still a fan at this point, until they start losing.
    @Fucter N. Hadasnack
    Well stated. If the NFL gives a list approved items, they are not going to speak out on every thing that isn’t approved. They are telling you this is what you can take and if you take anything else either check or take it at your own risk.
    @Slim
    Why would they all of sudden have to tell the players. If I remember right, this wasn’t on the approved product list. So why would the NFL need to tell the players. It wasn’t like they told them it was okay to take, found out it wasn’t and didn’t tell them and then tried to punish them Or am I forgetting something.
    ————-
    I still haven’t read where they check with the team and the team said it was ok after checking with the NFL. I was going to take something that wasn’t on the list, I would check.
    Bottom line, teams are going to continue to pass on the Vikings. Their pass defense didn’t get any better or at least hasn’t proven it has and their run defense just got another year older.

  20. forevervike says: Jul 9, 2009 1:16 PM

    They will not implode this year. They can by without the williams’ wall for four games. That division is pitiful. Hey fucter, fucter you.

  21. DCViking says: Jul 9, 2009 1:20 PM

    jimicos says: July 9, 2009 12:52 PM
    You know it, I know it, we all know it. The league didn’t take that step to announce what they knew because they knew they’d be expected to find all spiked supplements in the future.
    ——————————————-
    I disagree with this reasoning — just because the NFL knew something about StarCaps and released it wouldn’t put them on the hook for all supplements. After all, they wouldn’t indicate that they are testing all supplements, they would just be passing along information they (the NFL) came across which is relevant to their employees.
    Sharing information would, in my legal mind, be considered acting in good faith. Not sharing relevant information would be considered acting in bad faith with respect to the CBA.

  22. SpartaChris says: Jul 9, 2009 1:22 PM

    ZN0rseman says:
    July 9, 2009 11:54 AM
    The NFL is 100% in the wrong on this case, and they know it. They intentionally withheld information from the players that they knew would directly impact not only their livelihood, bu their health. In addition, the NFL was very selective about which teams were to be penalized, targeting only small market teams. They also know that, even with their army of lawyers, they don’t stand a chance if the case falls into the lap of Alan Page, a former NFL player who knows exactly how corrupt and ruthless the people running the NFL can be.
    I just can’t wait to see the large pile of money that leaves the NFL coffers when Pat and Kevin win their very large civil suit.
    “Revenge is a dish best served cold.”
    $0.02,
    –Z

    So what do you call the memo issued to the agents of the players specifically forbidding consuming or endorsing products made by Balanced Health Products? Obviously someone outside of the league and close to the players knew Starcaps was tainted since the memo came from the NFLPA and was sent to the agents.
    And I love your jilted school girl with no prom date comment about how the league specifically targeted small market teams. There’s no conspiracy here. These are guys selected at random for a drug test who all happened to test positive. Pretty much black and white.
    The simple fact is the league publishes a list of approved supplements. Every player knows this. They also know that if they choose to use something not on the approved list, it’s at their own peril. These guys rolled the dice and lost. Such is life.
    That said, while I think in all fairness they should be suspended, part of me hopes it happens later in the season so we can play you straight up when we meet in week 4.

  23. DCViking says: Jul 9, 2009 1:29 PM

    “Jackson, who signed a three-year, $8 million deal on March 4, is being counted on to shore up a run defense that ranked last in the NFL in 2008. But while he’ll be back on the field for training camp, it’s unclear if he’ll be available for the start of the season.
    He still faces a possible suspension for violating the league’s drug policy last season as one of several players who tested positive for a banned diuretic. Jackson’s individual case was deferred by the league last fall, and he filed a class-action lawsuit against the manufacturer of StarCaps, the dietary supplement later found to contain the NFL-banned drug Butemanide.
    —————————————————-
    In this instance, what does “deferred” mean?
    Why was just his case “deferred”?

  24. SpartaChris says: Jul 9, 2009 1:30 PM

    Creeper says:
    July 9, 2009 12:43 PM
    The logical result if these guys win is ridiculous. It’d mean that any substance not explicitly on the banned list is fair game to use. We all know that there are new ‘supplements’ that hit the market all the time, so this would all but gut the PED ban that’s in the CBA.

    Maybe they should negotiate terms that state only supplements on the approved list may be used and anything else will be considered doping? This would make things black and white, rather than the shades of gray we have now.

  25. SpartaChris says: Jul 9, 2009 1:37 PM

    Does anyone know if their contract forbids the use of diuretics for weight loss? If so, shouldn’t the team be taking some kind of disciplinary action?

  26. zygi milf says: Jul 9, 2009 1:38 PM

    Big Stretch says:
    July 9, 2009 11:40 AM
    if the Williams wall is not subject to suspension until their case is resolved, shouldn’t that be good news for Plax?
    ********
    Big difference. The Williamses are not turds. Plax is. Plax has had disiplinary issues in the past.

  27. titan_fan says: Jul 9, 2009 1:41 PM

    It kills me how the NFL can’t win. They’re damned if they do, damned if they don’t.
    So let’s see… Korey Stringer (of the Vikings) takes a banned supplement and eventually dies… the family blames the team and the NFL… lawsuits are brought up, settlements are reached.
    The flip side… NFL tries to do something about these supplements, doles out some punishments… ultimately gets sued, can’t seem to be able to enforce their own reasonable rules.
    People need to quit always pointing the finger and start accepting responsibility for themselves.

  28. Hungry N. Hadasnack says: Jul 9, 2009 1:44 PM

    forevervike says:
    July 9, 2009 1:16 PM
    They will not implode this year. They can by without the williams’ wall for four games. That division is pitiful. Hey fucter, fucter you.
    ______________________________
    No implosion this year, huh? That’s your word (hope) against histry’s, then (specifically, 48 consecutive years of PROVEN futility).
    So what will be the difference THIS YEAR?
    The utter lack of distractions?
    (the Favre circus, media scrutiny, QB controversy, split fanbase, player suspensions, positive drug tests, player hold-outs, incompetent and hated coach, poor ticket sales, lost veteran leadership, and move to L.A. not withstanding, of course).
    No, you’re probably right–they “can probably by without” anyway.
    The truth is–the only “pitiful” thing about that division is the sad-ass Lions and Vikings, who are nothing but a black mark on the otherwise rich, noble and successful histories of the Packers and Bears.
    They call ‘em the Halas (Conference) and Lombardi trophies for a reason, you dumb fucter.

  29. MNRunLeft says: Jul 9, 2009 1:48 PM

    @ jimicos
    Grady Jackson wasn’t part of the original group suspended though correct? If my memory serves me correct, I believe he wasn’t immediately suspended by the NFL last season like the Williams Wall and the Saints players were, and I was hoping to see if anyone knew why.

  30. Razon says: Jul 9, 2009 1:55 PM

    @forevervike
    Yes this is the year they win the Super Bowl…boy you can tell it is the offseason by the super positive happy happy joy joy attitude of Viking fan.

  31. bgaima01 says: Jul 9, 2009 1:55 PM

    For breaking the league’s rule, they should be suspended 4 games.
    For being difficult and not accpeting the penalties, suspend them another 8.
    Who cares anyway? Vikes won’t compete when they have Favre at QB who loves throwing picks and AP at RB who loves fumbling. Name change to the Minnesota Turnovers.

  32. darth_vincent says: Jul 9, 2009 2:04 PM

    looks like cheaters will win…. hopefully the Gods of Football will intervene and put an end to this travesty…
    and don’t forget – The NFL told the NFLPA that no player can endorse the product Starcaps. If a player couldn’t read between the lines on that warning… then they get what they deserve – a 4 game suspension for ingesting a banned substance.

  33. Slim79 says: Jul 9, 2009 2:05 PM

    “Why would they all of sudden have to tell the players. If I remember right, this wasn’t on the approved product list. So why would the NFL need to tell the players. It wasn’t like they told them it was okay to take, found out it wasn’t and didn’t tell them and then tried to punish them Or am I forgetting something.”
    _________________________________
    The better question is why wouldn’t the league tell the players that they found out StarCaps contained bumentide. If the league was concerned about the player’s overall health and well being I would think they would notify the players when/if they find out a certain supplement contains something that is a risk to their health.

  34. DCViking says: Jul 9, 2009 2:10 PM

    # SpartaChris says: July 9, 2009 1:37 PM
    Does anyone know if their contract forbids the use of diuretics for weight loss? If so, shouldn’t the team be taking some kind of disciplinary action?
    ——————————————–
    I believe they do have those provisions in their contracts — heard that someplace.
    Would guess that Vikings mgmt is more concerned about the suspensions than how the contract was violated at this point.

  35. DCViking says: Jul 9, 2009 2:10 PM

    bgaima01 says: July 9, 2009 1:55 PM
    For breaking the league’s rule, they should be suspended 4 games.
    For being difficult and not accpeting the penalties, suspend them another 8.
    ——————————————–
    Are you related to Bob_Nelson???

  36. LarryBird18 says: Jul 9, 2009 2:18 PM

    Does not matter, they are going to beat the case. They have proof that the NFL did not disclose that Beaumantide was a banned substance…Every body needs to quit Hating..Sure they are going to get out of it due to a loophole but they are good honest players…THEY WERE NOT TAKING STERIODS..I dont care if they get out of it…They have never had any issues before…so Green bay go F yourselfs and your 6-10 record…Boom

  37. whatthehellisgoingonoutthere says: Jul 9, 2009 2:28 PM

    #
    issues in the past.
    # titan_fan says: July 9, 2009 1:41 PM
    It kills me how the NFL can’t win. They’re damned if they do, damned if they don’t.
    So let’s see… Korey Stringer (of the Vikings) takes a banned supplement and eventually dies… the family blames the team and the NFL… lawsuits are brought up, settlements are reached.
    The flip side… NFL tries to do something about these supplements, doles out some punishments… ultimately gets sued, can’t seem to be able to enforce their own reasonable rules.
    People need to quit always pointing the finger and start accepting responsibility for themselves.
    ————
    You don’t understand how Vikings fans work. Living in MN, I can tell you that the only reason they think it’s a crock is because the two players are the key to the only thing it has going for it– it’s run defense. Pass D has been terrible and barely got better even though Jared Allen was supposedly going to fix that problem. If these were scrubs who weren’t the main cog in the defense like the linebackers or secondary, they wouldn’t be so up in arms over defending their innocence. It’s just typical pattern for Vikings fans.

  38. GrimReaper says: Jul 9, 2009 2:53 PM

    Fucter N. Hadasnack says….
    The truth is–the only “pitiful” thing about that division is the sad-ass Lions and Vikings, who are nothing but a black mark on the otherwise rich, noble and successful histories of the Packers and Bears.
    They call ‘em the Halas (Conference) and Lombardi trophies for a reason, you dumb fucter.
    Yup thats exactly what it is HISTORY! Who calls it the Halas Conference? You must be REALLY old or just stuck in the past. I vote for stuck in the past as you cant make any arguement based on “current” info or stats.
    The Lombardi trophy is named after a GREAT coach and motivater of men and a coach who didnt have a losing season to his credit. They didnt just decide one day to call it that because he was the Packers coach(although Im sure as a Packer fan you like to believe that fairy tale). Seems to me he also coached for Washington.
    Since 1966 the Packers have won 11 Division Titles, the Bears 9, Detoilet 3 and the Bucs 3 and then we get to the Vikings who have won 17. Second place is a ways back there.
    So you can take your little history lesson for ForeverVike and fucting choke on it.
    Now I cant argue SB titles cause only the Packers and Bears have won them in the Division. (Bucs won after they left the NFC Central) Even then it was 1966, 67 and 96 for the Packers and 1985 for the Bears) Almost a decade and a half for the Pack and 2.5 for the Bears. Quit living in the past and deal with the present. Lombardi and Halas aint winning anyone anything now!!

  39. purple hay-seuss says: Jul 9, 2009 3:00 PM

    Fucter,
    I love your positivity about what will happen. Were you positive that the Cardinals would be the cellar-dwellers in the NFC West again last year? Now THERE is a history of futility. Yet they overcame underdog status in every single playoff game in 08 and made it to the Super Bowl, losing only by a few amazing plays which qualify the game for ‘Best Super Bowl Ever Played’ status.
    You claim that Minnesota has a history of futility, saying something like (I won’t give you the courtesy of going back to cut/paste your own words) ‘The Vikings are ultimate losers and a stain on the nobility of the Packers’ and Bears’ contributions to the NFL for 80 years.’ Or some such horseapples. This is based only on the Vikings’ losing 4 Super Bowls. And that GB and CHI have been to many more SBs in 80 years.
    You claim nobility and gravity and righteousness because your team has been around longer? How Many ‘Bowls have the Bears been to in the Modern Era? I believe 2, winning one, more than 20 years ago. The Packers have been to 2, winning one. The Vikings 4, losing all. Say what you like, and you will, I’m sure, but I LIKE my team. I’ll be a fan until death because they are MINE. I have them, good and bad (plenty of both, over the years).
    Your bellowing and name-calling Vikings fans only makes us hold tighter and dig in deeper. Answer this: How many posts have you seen where a Viking fan openly states that they are leaving the Vikings for a more Noble team? A team with a ‘winning tradition’ and has better fried cheese curds at the stadium?
    That will be ZERO. And you won’t see any. See, dillrod, your blather is only getting you riled up and others like you all sweaty, too. Me and those like me, of whom there a very, very many, will never leave the Vikings no matter what you say or how many times you say BiQueens, or the latest childish armpit fart from your lot.
    The best revenge is living well. That and winning the Division. Which the Vikings did last year. I hope they do it this year, too. See you on the field, where it matters.

  40. Hungry N. Hadasnack says: Jul 9, 2009 3:17 PM

    @Grim,
    Um, (Conference) referred to what the Halas TROPHY was for…not the name of the Conference itself, oh wizardly one.
    And past is prologue my friend–even in the recent past, the best the Vikes have been able to do is a 1 and out playoff appearance.
    And without looking to the past, the best you can do is speculate and thump your chest and rah rah like a cheer-leader.
    But otherwise, you might be on to something… Packers fans love their fairy tails…(mispelling deliberate). Ummumm–fairy tails. The fairy-er. the better. Add a little cheese…um-hmm.

  41. GrimReaper says: Jul 9, 2009 3:31 PM

    whatthehellisgoingonoutthere says……
    You don’t understand how Vikings fans work. Living in MN, I can tell you that the only reason they think it’s a crock is because the two players are the key to the only thing it has going for it– it’s run defense. Pass D has been terrible and barely got better even though Jared Allen was supposedly going to fix that problem. If these were scrubs who weren’t the main cog in the defense like the linebackers or secondary, they wouldn’t be so up in arms over defending their innocence. It’s just typical pattern for Vikings fans.
    ………………………………………………………………………
    First it has nothing to do with being a Vikings “fan”. Anyone who defends them(any of the players involved, not just the Vikings players) sees the situation as a “setup”. If you would think back to when this story broke, they had tried to place calls for more info. to the league and never received return phone calls. So the league had info. it needed to pass down league wide and failed as a company/organization to inform their employees of this info. Thats like a company saying they are changing the “Expensing Rules” and not passing it on to the employees so that they can follow the changes and then deciding because this or that employee didnt follow it they are fired or suspended. Kind of sounds like a setup to me. And if Grady Jackson was still a Packer we would hear all the Packer fans defending them too. I think what it is is EVERYONE else in the division is SCARED of the Vikings and whats going to happen this year when they play them and are looking and HOPING for any kind of break or weakness. Even with a “terrible” pass defense as you point out they still won the Division. What does that say about the rest of the teams (PowderPuffs)? Chew on that for a while.

  42. purple hay-seuss says: Jul 9, 2009 3:36 PM

    Thanks, GrimReaper. I appreciate another rational person hitting back at the snotty little boys.
    Also, if you haters were to meet either of the Williamses in person, I’ll bet you don’t run your mouth like you do here. If you did, they would probably feel sorry for you. This is their business. Their livelihood. Their passion. How would you feel if you believe in your deepest heart and soul that you have done nothing wrong yet your boss comes at you with suspension and no pay for a month? You stand to lose a lot of money, right? What if you talk to a labor lawyer and that expert says you have a case and will benefit by standing to fight it? Do you listen, or do you roll back on yourself and cave and allow snotty little boys on a blog site to dictate your actions? Hell no.
    Further, you now have a public reputation to uphold. You’ve done nothing wrong in your whole career, yet you must now defend yourself from an aggressive public that will hiss and spit at you every time you appear. The Williamses took this upon themselves when they took these jobs. How much risk and public reputation do YOU have, moron? I’ll bet you work a paycheck job and bitch about how stupid the boss is. I’ll bet you have never taken a business risk or made a stand to make your own way and take responsibility for yourself. If so, congratulations. You’re one of the few. Most of the loudest idiots here have never done that.
    More power to Pat and Kevin Williams. If they lose, they lost fighting, believing in themselves. If they win, it’ll be sweeeeeet. And if you believe that Alan Page, that is Justice Alan Page, will be less than objective in this case, you are insulting him.
    I hope someday one of the Williams boys overhears a punk like you calling them Venus and Serena or the Sisters. The silence will be deafening except for you crapping yourself.

  43. jimicos says: Jul 9, 2009 3:53 PM

    MNRunLeft says:
    July 9, 2009 1:48 PM
    @ jimicos
    Grady Jackson wasn’t part of the original group suspended though correct? If my memory serves me correct, I believe he wasn’t immediately suspended by the NFL last season like the Williams Wall and the Saints players were, and I was hoping to see if anyone knew why.
    ——————————
    I don’t have the details behind that. I only knew what I looked up, and subsequently posted.

  44. GrimReaper says: Jul 9, 2009 3:54 PM

    Fucter N. Hadasnack says….
    And past is prologue my friend–even in the recent past, the best the Vikes have been able to do is a 1 and out playoff appearance.
    And without looking to the past, the best you can do is speculate and thump your chest and rah rah like a cheer-leader.
    ………………………………………………………………………….
    Seems to me the Packers have been out in the first/second round 3 of their last 4 trips into the playoffs and the 1 they werent you lost to the 5 seed in the 6 team NFC playoffs. A loss is a loss is a loss in the playoffs…who gives a rip what round. Your comparing apples to oranges and they are both fruits, kind of like you for your WEAK arguements and senseless statements. But keep believing in your Cheeseland fairytales and we will soon find out which one of us is for real and which one is Snow White.
    Well in the most recent past the Vikings won the Division. RAH-RAH. And if I remember correctly, and by all means look it up, the Vikings have had 25 playoff appearances to 24 for the Packers. So put that in your past loving pipe and smoke it. Seems to me the past favors the Vikings in every category but ONE. Albeit a big one, you have no other arguement. So take your loss and move on, kind of like the Packers did in 10 out of their 16 games last year.

  45. jimicos says: Jul 9, 2009 3:59 PM

    purple hay-seuss says:
    July 9, 2009 3:00 PM
    How Many ‘Bowls have the Bears been to in the Modern Era? I believe 2, winning one, more than 20 years ago. The Packers have been to 2, winning one. The Vikings 4, losing all. Say what you like, and you will, I’m sure, but I LIKE my team. I’ll be a fan until death because they are MINE. I have them, good and bad (plenty of both, over the years).
    ———————————–
    The Packers have been to 4 Super Bowls, winning three. Get your facts straight, hayseuss.
    http://www.pro-football-reference.com/super-bowl/

  46. TheBaySay says: Jul 9, 2009 4:00 PM

    I’m just reeling in shock here that a judge in Minnesota would deliver a decision in favor of two members of a Minnesota pro team. No one could have seen that coming down Main St….

  47. purple hay-seuss says: Jul 9, 2009 4:07 PM

    Fucter,
    Your screen name is just oh so clever.
    “The past is prologue”…..Wow. So because it’s happened before it’ll happen again. Or, What has come before is only an introduction to what WILL happen. I get it. This is fun. The Packers have a winning tradition, so they will always win games. Da Bears have really dark blue uniforms, so they will always and in perpetuity live in the dark? (waiting for comment on how ugly the new Vikings unis are………) OK, so you’re right. Let’s just cut the NFL into those teams with a noble, legitimate, righteous winning tradtions. That will be roughly 12 teams. The rest of the losers might as well go home, I guess. And are YOU the arbiter of deciding the definition of a ‘winning tradition’? I hope so, because Raider Nation will eat you alive, buddy. Indy will hit you hard. Jacksonville will swing that axe. Tampa Bay is pissed already. Arizona has lots of really, really serious fans, too. They won’t be happy after losing arguably the best Super Bowl in history.
    You go right ahead and lay out the playoffs and has-beens right now. I’ll call the press and they’ll be there for the gory details. God, I love people who think they know everything because it’s so easy to throw it back in their snotty faces.
    The games are played every week to see who can win this time. Prologue, my ass.

  48. Hungry N. Hadasnack says: Jul 9, 2009 4:14 PM

    @ Purple,
    Well-put. But to repond, first–you can see my remarks to Grim.
    Like you say, until the game is played, it’s all speculation and baloney and cheerleading.
    Secondly, you misjudge my intent by a long-shot if you think I’m trying to CONVERT anyone.
    My motives are FAR less noble than that–mostly it’s about sport, entertaining myself.
    But the media also wants the Vikes in the Superbowl, and Cutler on a cross (among other biases), so some of us out here are forced to call out the faults, foibles and hypocrisies that abound.
    Mostly, though, I’m just talking a little sh1t and having a little fun, getting my requisite digs in on an enemy franchise; nothing more, nothing less.
    Really, it’s about a football rivalry, not about YOU and how YOU feel about YOUR team–so get over yourself.

  49. fireplug says: Jul 9, 2009 4:41 PM

    Um, I know this will be a stupid question, but at one time the Vikings had their Purple People Eaters defensive line………..and wasn’t there a Greg Larson included in that line? Of course, this Judge Larson making this ruling could in no way be the same person, could he?

  50. purple hay-seuss says: Jul 9, 2009 5:19 PM

    Isn’t it interesting. A loudmouth that sees himself for what he is. Thanks! Refreshing. I guess I’ll have to learn to just make armpit farts and burp out loud, too, if I want to play with you guys.
    You insulted me with your trash. Therefore I took it personally. I responded (I think) intelligently.
    You’re calling me wrong by telling me to get over myself. I’ll write what I like until the moderator says otherwise.
    UP YOURS, FART BREATH!! Is that better?

  51. purpleguy says: Jul 9, 2009 5:38 PM

    Most people are missing the point here, although it seems everyone’s position depends upon what team they root for.
    The Minnesota decision and legal action is narrowed down to whether the NFL policies violates Minnesota employee drug testing law, which it clearly does. As Mike noted way back when, the collective bargaining agreement will only supersede MN law if the bargaining agreement contains the proper language — it doesn’t.
    You will note from the NFL statement that they are trying to emphasize that point, and that federal law applies, which is a ridiculous point since not only does the collective bargaining agreement lack the necessary language, but the NFL has already admitted players are employees of each team (who in turn are employees in that state).
    This presupposes the federal appeal is unsuccessful and that the underlying arguments everyone has rehashed above are not valid — points that are stronger than the norm for these particular players. Further, the Hennepin County District Court has about a 1 year civil trial block lag time even if the District Court doesn’t stay the action pending the federal court appeal — which has an even longer delay. Hell, Pat Williams may be retired or die of a heart attack before this is done.
    There’s a good reason the NFL has tried to settle this one.

  52. Hungry N. Hadasnack says: Jul 9, 2009 5:48 PM

    Hey Hay-Suess (clever screen names, indeed),
    We’re getting our signals crossed in this little love-fest we’re having–the timing’s off on the responses, obviously.
    Let me go back a bit:
    I only brought out the whole “tradition” angle because some other dolt-hole Viking fan called it a “pathetic division”–now you go run off and check it, I’ll wait right here.
    See?
    I’m not saying to live in the past, by any means–I’m saying don’t trash teams as “pathetic” who have not only laid the foundation for the league, but who have proven to be FAR more successful than yours, both in history and recently.
    It’s hypocrisy, the pot calling the kettle the N-word.
    You don’t need to tell ME that the game’s played on the field, and to keep an eye on the future, Captian obvious–I got that.
    But it doesn’t mean you don’t/can’t/shouldn’t look to the past (both immediate and long-term) as a viable way to predict the future–how else do you do it then, Special Edward?
    It’s called a TREND (and let’s be honest–the only recent trends the Vikings have are in disaappointment).
    And you’re pathetic little attempt to rally the entire league’s fans against me–as if I somehow disparaged them all–is a just sad bit of pandering.
    Like I said–I’m a rival fan getting my digs in, nothing more, nothing less.
    Sorry your team is so bad it’s caused you to become this defensive. Sheesh.
    Cleverly,
    F

  53. Razon says: Jul 9, 2009 5:56 PM

    @slim
    The better question is why wouldn’t the league tell the players that they found out StarCaps contained bumentide. If the league was concerned about the player’s overall health and well being I would think they would notify the players when/if they find out a certain supplement contains something that is a risk to their health.
    ——-
    But then are they required to report it anytime? They have the list of approve products that should be good enough.
    So if they notify every time the one time they miss, the player could use that as a get out of jail…the league didn’t tell me.
    A player should be concerned about the risk to their health first. They were not in this case, I am sure the following conversation, not even the first part took place.
    Player: Trainer should I take this, I need to lose some weight?
    Trainer: Hey this isn’t on the approved product, let me get back to you?
    Trainer: hey don’t take this…

  54. ProfessorSaint says: Jul 9, 2009 6:57 PM

    I haven’t taken the time to read every response here, but Plax committed a crime in New York. Taking Starcaps is not a crime; it just contains a substance banned by the NFL because of its masking properties. This has no bearing on Plax’s situation; he is sunk.
    This decision, which is based on a Minnesota law concerning first drug offenses, is really about whether a collective bargaining agreement that is goverened by federal law can be trumped by a state law. I have to tell you that it still doesn’t look good for the Williamses, because usually federal law takes precedence.

  55. whatthehellisgoingonoutthere says: Jul 9, 2009 11:09 PM

    @Fucter
    You don’t have to go out of your way to prove that the Vikings fans are ridiculously stupid. They do that on their own quite well with their assertions and half assed comments that aren’t even grounded in reality or fact.

  56. GrimReaper says: Jul 10, 2009 8:52 AM

    Fucter N. Hadasnack says….
    You don’t need to tell ME that the game’s played on the field, and to keep an eye on the future, Captian obvious–I got that.
    But it doesn’t mean you don’t/can’t/shouldn’t look to the past (both immediate and long-term) as a viable way to predict the future–how else do you do it then, Special Edward?
    It’s called a TREND (and let’s be honest–the only recent trends the Vikings have are in disaappointment).
    ………………………………………………………………………….
    What the fucter does the past have ANYTHING to do with prediciting the future?? Trends? I already gave you the number since 1967. The TREND is the Vikings will win the Division and make the playoffs more time than the Cheese Curds. So you baseless arguement about the past is worthless. If the past begets the future in your mind than all signs point, again, to the Vikings having more success than anyone in the Division.
    So sounds to me like you believe the PAST Packer players and coaches, etc will have an impact on the upcoming season? Gimme a break!! How is looking back at what they did ANY way to indicate whats to come? Its not. For 1, thats why it is so hard to repeat as SB champs. The past cannot account for injuries suffered today or hell, someone getting hit by a bus. Thats why they have the old saying in the NFL…” On any given Sunday” Which means any team can win. I know you would much rather have them give out the Division title based on the past and most “historic” team than actually have to watch the Packers(Bears and Lions also) suffer through another losing season. You cant predict injuries….you cant TREND injuries. Time to live in the present.
    I am a fan just as much as you are but to come in here and throw your garbage around just confirms to me how intelligent(NOT) you are. As for a TREND for the Vikings, all I can say is I would be more disappointed to lose in the playoffs than to not make them. Which seems to me has happened more than you care to admit to the Packers.

  57. GrimReaper says: Jul 10, 2009 9:05 AM

    whatthehellisgoingonoutthere says…
    You don’t have to go out of your way to prove that the Vikings fans are ridiculously stupid. They do that on their own quite well with their assertions and half assed comments that aren’t even grounded in reality or fact.
    …………………………………………………………………..
    Go back and read my comments. Everything I said is based on fact. Im sure living in MN and being a Cheese Curd you wouldnt dare say any of this outloud. Keep hiding behind the computer. But by all means prove me wrong on my “half-assed” comments. I know for a fact not one of us has made any assertions about anything. The only one who has is you and I quote ” You don’t understand how Vikings fans work. Living in MN, I can tell you that the only reason they think it’s a crock is because the two players are the key to the only thing it has going for it– it’s run defense. Pass D has been terrible and barely got better even though Jared Allen was supposedly going to fix that problem. If these were scrubs who weren’t the main cog in the defense like the linebackers or secondary, they wouldn’t be so up in arms over defending their innocence. It’s just typical pattern for Vikings fans.”
    Thats a pretty big assertion right there.

  58. jimicos says: Jul 10, 2009 9:43 AM

    GrimReaper says:
    July 9, 2009 3:54 PM
    Seems to me the Packers have been out in the first/second round 3 of their last 4 trips into the playoffs and the 1 they werent you lost to the 5 seed in the 6 team NFC playoffs. A loss is a loss is a loss in the playoffs…who gives a rip what round. Your comparing apples to oranges and they are both fruits, kind of like you for your WEAK arguements and senseless statements. But keep believing in your Cheeseland fairytales and we will soon find out which one of us is for real and which one is Snow White.
    Well in the most recent past the Vikings won the Division. RAH-RAH. And if I remember correctly, and by all means look it up, the Vikings have had 25 playoff appearances to 24 for the Packers. So put that in your past loving pipe and smoke it. Seems to me the past favors the Vikings in every category but ONE. Albeit a big one, you have no other arguement. So take your loss and move on, kind of like the Packers did in 10 out of their 16 games last year.
    ——————————-
    Seems to me the Packers have won the division 4 times and the Vikings once.
    Seems to me some of the Packers’ league championships came BEFORE the advent of the NFL playoffs. Therefore, your statistic about 24 playoff appearances is misleading.
    Seems to me the Vikings haven’t won a playoff game in 5 years.
    Seems to me the real score is 12 championships to 0 or 3 Super Bowls to 0.
    Seems to me the Packers have a long-term answer at QB. The Vikings… (crickets chirping)

  59. GrimReaper says: Jul 10, 2009 11:36 AM

    jimicos says…
    Seems to me the Packers have won the division 4 times and the Vikings once.
    Seems to me some of the Packers’ league championships came BEFORE the advent of the NFL playoffs. Therefore, your statistic about 24 playoff appearances is misleading.
    Seems to me the Vikings haven’t won a playoff game in 5 years.
    Seems to me the real score is 12 championships to 0 or 3 Super Bowls to 0.
    Seems to me the Packers have a long-term answer at QB. The Vikings… (crickets chirping)
    ………………………………………………………………………….
    LOL…you are too funny. Go look up the stats you moron. If you want to get right down to it…then the Vikings have an NFL Championship also. Go look up the stats…because I did. That 24 DOES include the those. OOOOOO so its 12-1. And if you know anything the Packer have been around longer and played more games, etc…something like 400 more games and they still dont have as many playoff trips. Here is a quote from NFL.com.
    “Over the past quarter-century, the Minnesota Vikings have consistently been at the top of their division. During that same period, only Dallas has made more playoff appearances. In addition, only four teams have played in more Super Bowls than Minnesota, which participated in Super Bowls IV, VIII, IX and XI.”
    And thats just 25 years…theres still another 22 to count. The Packers started in 1921 the Vikings in 1961 and we still have more playoff trips. Get your facts straight before stepping up to the big dogs. Long term anwer at QB for the Packers….LOL!! A fairy for a QB in a fairytale land. If he is so good why did he go from a top draft pick to number 20 something. Are you trying to tell me that the Packers saw something that 20 some other teams missed. Gimme a break…he was all that was left and they needed to plan for the future. The only reason his numbers were at all good was because the Pack trailed almost EVERY game and had to throw the ball(he had 536 attempts). And 2 or your wins came against Detoilet. You blew chunks against the NFC.
    Havent won a playoff game in 5 years….you really want to go there. OK..I will. We went in 08 and lost to Philly. Then the time before that was in 04 against, you guessed it, the Packers and we beat them 31-17 AT Lambeau. Again get your facts straight. I know its hard with visions of having a losing season in your mind. So your staement about not winning a playoff game in 5 years is WRONG!!!!!

  60. Hungry N. Hadasnack says: Jul 10, 2009 3:42 PM

    Grim–
    I can’t believe I’m actually debating with someone who would use “(NOT!)” after an adjective, as if THAT is somehow a valid or persuausive tactic.
    (Man! Why do I keep falling for that, whenever 5th Graders unleash that masterful trick upon me?!?!?)
    Well, if a cat can be enetertained by a dead mouse, why not? I’ll entertain myself for a bit…
    The past has NOTHING to do with predicting the future, you say?
    God, you ARE special.
    Sure, there are surprises, and “any team on any given Sunday blah f*cking blah…”
    But given YOUR (il)logic, every single year, Vegas odds-makers (what do they know, right?) would have each team’s odds at winning the Superbowl as 1:31–they’d all be even.
    So–by your retarded-assed logic–the Lions and, say, Patriots (or Steelers) have an equal LIKELIHOOD of winning the Superbowl.
    Christ, your caretakers must have your helmet strapped on too tight.
    Yes, in reality, each team starts 0-0, but there are TRENDS, HISTORIES, and PAST PERFORMANCES we all look to to make EDUCATED predictions about what is MOST likely to happen.
    Can you not grasp this simple concept, or is it just that it’s inconvenient to your stubborn and retarded arguments?
    I originally made my point to illustrate that the North was anything BUT a pathetic division–in fact it included the same two teams that founded the league, and both with a rich tradition of winning. Between them, __ championships and blah blah (I don’t feel like looking it all up).
    The Bears, I know, have more players than any team in the HOF. And I mentioned the trophies namesakes, and so on.
    But then, when you (or one of your fellow purple-helmet loving horn-blowing chest-beaters) said history didn’t matter, I made the same point that I made above–that the BEST predictor we have for what a team WILL do is look to look at what it HAS DONE (especially recently).
    And–once again–all the Vikings have really done recently is DISAPPOINT.
    You point to last year’s division title…
    Well, all we had heard LAST off-season was how good the Vikings were (that’s all we hear, every year), and how they were going to win the SB.
    And did they?
    …* cue crickets*…
    Like I said–disappointment.
    Oh, and one final point–in keeping with your astounding insights and brilliant aptitiude for keen perceptions, I should telkl you that I ENJOY the Packer-bashing.
    Why?
    Because I’m a BEARS FAN, you myopic blubbering DOLT!!
    You know what they say about assuming, don’t you?
    So, please, by all means, insult the hell out of those cheese-slurpers!!
    I love that you kept creating all those dumb little straw-man arguments about the Packers–as if I cared!! HA!
    So, back to my point:
    Vikings were “supposed” to be the Superbowl contenders last year…(and again this year, apparently).
    Hardly.
    The Bears were barely expected to win 6 games, with a crap QB and no WRs–yet they were even up with the Vikes until week 17.
    So, I’m willing to *bet*–based on our recent histories–that you can expect that little TREND to continue:
    Bears will perform ABOVE the typical expectations.
    And the Vikings will (continue to!) disappoint.
    See you in hell, dumbass.

  61. GrimReaper says: Jul 10, 2009 4:58 PM

    LOL Fucter…..you seem to know way too much about helmets. And NOT the football kind you fucting idiot. Bears fan Packers fan blabla. Who gives a sh_t. I can make the same damn argument based on them. You still cant tell me WHY or HOW the past and what Brett Favre or George Halas or Jim McMahon has to do with how the BEARS, Packers or any fucting one else will do much less any other team.
    Vegas odds are based on strength of schedule from the previous year(which no ONE knows, not even you Yoda, until AFTER the season is played out), injuries, and winning percentage from team vs team. Secondly, Vegas doesnt know anything. First off all they make their predictions BEFORE a single game has been played and based on ODDS. Thats why its called gambling you SP.ED.
    Based on your “wise” thoughts on predicting finishes, then we can say for certain the Bears wont finish first and neither will the Pack or the Lions. The Bears dont have a “history” with Cutler. So what are you basing it on? McMahon? 1986? Grossman? 2006? Again look at my stats for the Division since 1966…that will answer any questions you have about HISTORY and TRENDS. And thats just what it is is history. But then again the sun shines on a dogs ass once in a while. But you keep living in the past and you will see how fast the Bears 09 season will be in the past tense.
    To respond to your comments about my (il)logic….its all a guessing game. No history, no trends can predict ANY GIVEN SUNDAY. When everyone starts out 0-0 they all have the same chance(other than in Vegas) so your arguement about Vegas doesnt hold water unless your a gambler.
    I agree with your “recently” comment. And most recently the Vikings won the Division with OUT a QB and the Bears didnt. Then again in most recent history, the Bears lost a SB and hardly have a player left on the team from then. Maybe 6-8?? So for you to base finishes off of history doesnt bode well for you or da’ Bears. Base it off of stats and black and white info.,….not odds.
    Speaking of Stats AND History….lets blend them together. So based on recent history, the Bears should be picked to finish no better than 8-8 because over the last 2 years they are 16-16. Also the crap QB you mention was no better than the one who he took the starting job from who led you to the SB in 06. Again, as with the Pack, the Bears have been around for 40+ more years than the Vikings and they also only have 24 playoff appearances to 25 for the Vikings. History? Trends? Its all in black and white. Apparently you would rather debate BS with me than base your “thoughts” on anything concrete.
    I think it is hilarious that you say they will “continue” to perform above expectations…cant really go anywhere but up after 16-16 over the last 2 years and no playoffs for the Bears since 06. Keep banking on trends and history…works for me.
    Lets just let them play it out on the field. Wont be much of a game as AP will run all over Da’ Bears. Maybe another 224 and 3 TDs for History sake. Then throw in a Favre TD pass or 2 and the Bears will be history…literally!!

  62. Hungry N. Hadasnack says: Jul 10, 2009 5:36 PM

    I’m dumber for just having tried to make a coherent thought out of all that nonsensical rambling and meaningless rhetoric…
    Much like scripture, the Devil can quote stats and figures to suit his purpose…like your shell game with the playoff appearances.
    Example: Over the past 4 years (under Lovie’s leadership), the Bears won the 2nd most games (2nd highest winning percentage) in the ENTIRE NFC, after the Giants.
    So, you can twist numbers any way you want, the same as I twist your momma’s t1ts.
    It doesn’t mean crap.
    AP probably will run all over the Bears…as he chases down the defender who picked up his fumble.
    And if Kyle freakin’ Orton was able to carve up your secondary, just wait until you see what Cutler can do.
    And I’ve got a feeeling Father time is ready to collect his due from your Williams Sisters (on the worst side of 35, right?)…then watch how the defense folds domino-style from there.
    And Favre? His recent history against the Bears is something like 13 ints to 4 TDs. No, that’s not backwards.
    We’ll feast on his old ass, again.
    As usual, the Vikes are all hype once again, like they are perenially.
    The deserve a coach like Childo, an overblown attention whore like Favre, and fans that won’t even buy out a home playoff game.
    Sad. Disappointing. Pathetic.
    I’ll believe something different when I actually see it.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!