Will Smith and Charles Grant to Play Against Detroit Lions

by Saintsational on Sep 8, 2009 3:31 PM CDT Comment 17 comments

No suspensions yet, per the Times-Pic...

New Orleans Saints defensive ends Charles Grant and Will Smith will not be suspended this week according to NFL spokesman Greg Aiello.

Given the sub-par production the Saints have gotten out of their two high-paid defensive ends, I haven't yet decided whether this is good or bad.

Poll

Will Charles Grant and Will Smith eventually be suspended?

Yes, eventually.

276 votes

No, never.

95 votes

Yes, any day now.

63 votes

Yes, but not at the same time.

32 votes

I hope they're suspended for the entire season.

22 votes

488 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs | Comment 17 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

not sure about this news

I had resigned myself to the fact that we were without these two for the first four games, which appeared manageable. When Grant blew his hamstring in preseason against the Bengals, me and the guy next to me looked at each other and said “he isn’t playing until October anyway.” Now, is Grant eligible to play but can’t because of hammy? meaning around the time he gets healthy, he gets suspended? Grant should have taken his suspension last year when he was on IR half the year anyway.

Anyway, this is like having the abusive girlfriend dump you, then come back and say that maybe we have a future together. That’s what a friend told me anyway.

AAAGGHHHHH

Being a Saints fan will take years off your life

by MobileSaint on Sep 8, 2009 3:42 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

For f**k's sake, get it over with!!

The Saints spent the entire offseason and preseason, and millions of dollars preparing for the apparent inevitability of this suspension. They had a timeline. They found some real gems in FA. Now a new, even stupider monkeywrench? It’s this kind of “devil in the details” BS that makes me believe in an NFL conspiracy against it’s small market brethren. Can Smith and Grant just serve their “suspensions” voluntarily, then continue their case to clear their names of steroid implications on their own schedules?

by FuSoYa on Sep 8, 2009 3:49 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

get real

would you willing give up a months paycheck for something you don’t think you did wrong? its not about these guys clearing their good name its about them standing up to the man and saying they aren’t at fault. i’m all for them fighting back and trying to not get suspended at all. the nfl is trying to rake these guys over the coals and i think they should fight back as hard as possible. if you believe you are in the right you don’t just lay down and give up cause its more convenient.

by knucklesmalone on Sep 9, 2009 5:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

You do if

you’re a multimillionaire underachiever that plays a team sport. I understand they don’t want to lose money or admit wrongdoing if they think they’re innocent, but planning for the suspension at one time, then having it pushed back indefinitely isn’t helping anyone. No one seems to think they’re going to win now. They’re just going to be suspended at a different time. Which four games of the year do you think would be better to deal with this than the first four?

by FuSoYa on Sep 9, 2009 8:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

any news about whether it's

going to be concurrent or whether they’ll serve them sequentially?

by jful on Sep 8, 2009 3:49 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I will email Greg Aiello

and try to find out.

Wanna say something? Sign up! It's free!

by Saintsational on Sep 8, 2009 3:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

From Greg Aiello

Dave: We are not enforcing the suspensions this week but have no further comment on it right now.

Wanna say something? Sign up! It's free!

by Saintsational on Sep 8, 2009 4:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

you are SOOOOOO connected

you should Tweet

Being a Saints fan will take years off your life

by MobileSaint on Sep 8, 2009 5:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

like, totally!

Wanna say something? Sign up! It's free!

by Saintsational on Sep 8, 2009 6:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

thanks for the detective work

but the “no comment” stuff is always annoying, but particularly so with an issue that’s this old. the nfl really should have resolved this by now—they’ve really mishandled the whole situation—and this inability to mediate effectively this whole thing is really poor form. does anyone else see this as a complete poop-storm?

by jful on Sep 9, 2009 8:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

doesn't really surprise me

Matt Jones was arrested for possession of cocaine last July and didn’t wind up serving his THREE game suspension (can you say “inconsistency”?) until December, due to the ofttimes lengthy appeals process. Of course, the Jaguars were out of playoff contention by then, so it didn’t even matter. I’m sure this will come back to bite the Saints in the ass at some point. On the optimistic tip, I’m looking forward to drowning my sorrows over an ice cold pitcher of Abita Turbodog and the melancholy sounds of the world’s smallest violin. Pre-requesting Lily Allen’s “No Fair”. Thanks, miniature violinist.

"It feels like a tiny prick " -Reggie Bush

by coldpizza on Sep 9, 2009 9:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

agreed

we need more consistency in punishments. especially after the last 2 years of arrests/drugs/killings. Make them into categories. Like: killing=1 year ban; arrests for certan charges are 2/4 game suspensions(misdemeanors, felonies); drug(ie steroids or the league finding out you’re doing cocaine)=4 game suspensions. these are just examples, not really the suspensions they should use but just a guideline to have certain things meaning certain games and have a guidline for it so it’s more consistent.

Superbowl bound!!!...I hope? Go Saints! :D

by skinnykinney on Sep 9, 2009 3:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I know it was just an example

but, for the record, I’d be just fine with a killing=out of the league(and society, if possible) kind of rule.

by FuSoYa on Sep 9, 2009 3:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think he was referring to negligent homicide. I would hope the legal system would render player suspensions moot via long term incarceration, if it were premeditated in any way. I don’t really have a problem with anyone who “did their time” (for whatever the reason) being given a chance to redeem himself. There may be a few exceptions to that. A former Gitmo detainee filling in for Garrett Hartley … not such a good idea.

"It feels like a tiny prick " -Reggie Bush

by coldpizza on Sep 9, 2009 5:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

ok coldpizza

i just angrily responded to you (driving home in miami traffic has a tendency to bring out my grumpy side) on another thread, but reading this one i see you can peacefully coexist as a normal member in this happy discursive online saintsland.

and i agree—the league is way too inconsistent and uses way too many double-standards. but it’s not an inherent problem and one that should and could easily be solved.

and i really like lily allen, except that song’s about a guy who is terrible in bed… so the appropriateness factor is a bit questionable.

by jful on Sep 9, 2009 3:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

so glad

I could mold my behavior to fit your standards of satisfaction. Dig Lily Allen, admittedly haven’t listened to the words of that particular song closely enough to know what it was about. Picked up on the fellatio reference, didn’t blink much, punched up a She & Him (Zooey Deschanel) chaser … lather, rinse, repeat.

"It feels like a tiny prick " -Reggie Bush

by coldpizza on Sep 9, 2009 5:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs