Another failed (diluted) combine drug test..Jabrill Peppers

[DougDew]

No great loss.  He's an overrated tweener anyway.

[Defjamz26]

41 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

TBH, we don't know that it didn't... Assuming that it didn't since we haven't heard otherwise, the whole idea of a diluted sample is hard to accept.

 

I'd also say that all these players this year talking about "water weight" and whatnot should be at greater risk of diluted samples, but I haven't heard anything about that.

Exactly. It's affected too little people (2) this year for it to just be written off. If it was like 10-15 prospects I'd say okay, maybe something's off. But 2 people and it turns out both were "sick"? 

[ColtsBlueFL]

1 hour ago, BOTT said:

Foster in the first and Peppers in the 2nd

 

Woo hoo!

 

 

[ColtsBlueFL]

4 hours ago, Indeee said:

personally I don't care about timelines or whatever. i'm sick of these FOOTBALL players being labeled like the we're brain surgeons. If the dude can play then draft him. Period. Diluted sample??? again who cares

 

Owners, and coaches that want players that aren't suspended, and are truthful.

 

4 hours ago, Smonroe said:

 

I posted this earlier, Willie McGinnest said he failed the same way, after trying to rehydrate. 

 

Dilute - does not mean they detected drugs.  It means they're worried the subject is trying to mask the drug.

 

 

 

I just want to get this out there-

 

Negative and positive results are just what they seem.  However, if it’s positive-dilute, there was still a sufficient amount of drug in the urine to produce a positive result, so it’s still a positive.

 

If a sample is negative-dilute, however, that’s often a different story. A common way to pass a drug test is to consume mass quantities of water so that urine runs clear. This can often be enough to pass a drug test, even if there are drugs in a donor’s system.

 

How is this known? Experience.

 

Most test labs clients have a requirement to get a retest of those donors getting negative-dilute results, and a good many of those come back positive on round two. The others? Some people just drink a lot of water.

 

It's the amount of creatinine in the sample that determines the concentration of the sample (diluted or not). A Diluted Negative sample can also contain detectable amounts of drug(s) in them, just not up to the minimum level specified to be considered positive. Therefore, if the individual's drug concentration is near the cutoff of an assay, the urine may be diluted enough so that the sample will test below the cutoff level.

 

Only the NFL and the affected player(s) knows, though.  There are harsh penalties in the CBA drug policy for leaking that info.

[DougDew]

26 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Exactly. It's affected too little people (2) this year for it to just be written off. If it was like 10-15 prospects I'd say okay, maybe something's off. But 2 people and it turns out both were "sick"? 

Its the attitude.  They will even lie with the understanding you know they are lying.

 

They know plenty of people will cheer them on to defy authority then laugh about it.

[csmopar]

4 hours ago, Smonroe said:

 

If I remember correctly, the NFLPA agreed to blood testing for HGH with the last contract in 2011.  Then the lawyers fought about what that means for about three years.

 

As I understood it then, only an * would fail the test because it basically only tested if you had it in your system for the last 48 hours.  And I think they gave you advance knowledge of when they'd test you.

I could be wrong, but that's how I remember it.

Depends on what drug(s) are tested for. Every drug has a timeline in terms of how quickly it gets filtered out by your system. Pot is one of the longest staying drugs while cocaine can be out of your system in 24-48 hours. Ultimately the best way if they truly wanted to know is a hair test but those are expensive, time consuming however they will show if you have ever done drugs.... but then someone would just shave all their body hair off if they wanted to hide it  point is, no test is 100 percent tamper proof but i know that blood testing for drugs has the fewest negatives when it comes to results 

[dgambill]

7 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I'm not inclined to believe this or to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I think the story is plausible. 

Ehhh. Yeah I don't believe it on either one.  It's a failed test regardless how it comes out and still puts them in the program. These guys get drilled with advice for months on how to answer how to run the 40 how to maximize every test but not how to pass a urine test?? Don't buy it....not even close. Think about this....they play 60 minutes of football in the SEC in the most humid environment or in the Big Ten but they can't make it through like 4 seconds of running or a couple jumps or a drill or two without POUNDING water all night! Please....they aren't going to cramp up they don't even work up a sweat. It's a light workout for all extensive purposes and way more mental stressing then physical. I don't buy it. Maybe to put on weight I suppose but even that they had months to get their weight right and not over night. Didn't Fornette say his weight was water weight yet he didn't dilute his test? Not buying it. Not saying these are bad kids or can't play football but I'm not buying the stories.

[Colts1324]

10 hours ago, Rackeen305 said:

Well, If you were a fan of J.Peppers, then this is your opportunity to get him somewhere in the second.

He's be a steal at number 47 in the second round. I've read he was cramping and had to have fluids put in his body. I've dealt with cramps the last 5 years due to kidney disease, and have had fluids put in my body through IV's several times. 

 

If if this is the case he will still be a first rounder. 

[stitches]

I've heard from other people that dillute samples happen with players that are keeping hydrated during training/competition. This and Foster's probe might not be as big of a deal as they are being presented.

 

Joe Thomas raises another good point - if there is a non-negligible chance of a player giving dillute sample because of nothing wrong he's done, why not just make him take another sample later in the day/next day? This doesn't seem unreasonable to me. 

[dgambill]

17 minutes ago, stitches said:

I've heard from other people that dillute samples happen with players that are keeping hydrated during training/competition. This and Foster's probe might not be as big of a deal as they are being presented.

 

Joe Thomas raises another good point - if there is a non-negligible chance of a player giving dillute sample because of nothing wrong he's done, why not just make him take another sample later in the day/next day? This doesn't seem unreasonable to me. 

While I agree I'm going to assume he was in the midst of summer training camp in 90 degree heat or during season before or after games or practice. Not before he did a couple wind sprints and a couple drills that didn't even require him to break a sweat. I don't buy the stories. Honestly I don't understand testing for weed. It doesn't give a competitive advantage and it is increasingly being legalized in medical form. Look I don't agree with legalizing it or promoting it but I don't see why the league is demonizing it. Now if you get arrested that's one thing but tested no I don't get it. I think it will be out of the next bargaining agreement as both players and even now some owners are moving to normalize it.

[jskinnz]

16 hours ago, Indeee said:

personally I don't care about timelines or whatever. i'm sick of these FOOTBALL players being labeled like the we're brain surgeons. If the dude can play then draft him. Period. Diluted sample??? again who cares

 

Dear God...

[ColtsBlueFL]

9 hours ago, stitches said:

I've heard from other people that dillute samples happen with players that are keeping hydrated during training/competition. This and Foster's probe might not be as big of a deal as they are being presented.

 

Joe Thomas raises another good point - if there is a non-negligible chance of a player giving dillute sample because of nothing wrong he's done, why not just make him take another sample later in the day/next day? This doesn't seem unreasonable to me. 

 

Timing and logistics may well play a part.  When do they test these prospective NFL workforce applicants for the combine? How many players are test (rhetorical... all 330 of them!) and how long is the player at the combine?

 

Now consider, how long does it take to transport the samples to the lab. how long does it take to test each of the 330 samples?  How long does it take to 'read' and document the results for each sample? How long does it take to get al of those results back to the NFL reps?  How long does it take for them to determine those who failed?  Then how long to inform the reps of every team of the results obtained?

 

Souids easy at first, but not when you have 330 in a very short period of time.  Combine could very well be over by the time this process is completed properly, IMO.

[JohnWilliams]

Nice Input Everyone! My name is John Williams, I am new to this forum.

[ColtsBlueFL]

Welcome, John.  Glad to have you part of the discussions.