Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 12832786)

Of course it does.

But we all have our moments. Not necessarily with nurses but maybe with a waiter or a secretary or some poor schlub just manning a front desk.

I know I've been pretty irritated with myself after encounters with umpires before. At the time I was dead positive I was justified and the next day I may have still thought I was justified but I knew I shouldn't have taken it to the level I did.

And frankly, I don't even make a very good point when I say that I want a little crazy on our defense. I've stood nose to nose after sprinting through the infield to get into it with an ump but when I played football and got sent over the middle on a crackback block, you bet your ass I slowed up before I set the block and more often than not I got my ass handed to me for it. I can be a high-strung asshole to the wrong people on occasion but it doesn't mean I was an aggressive football player.

But my point is that it isn't all that indicative of his character; dude may have just been having a bad ****ing day and yes, that's absolutely a reason. It may not be a justification for it, but not a one of us is above it.

And we don't know when/how he found out. I suspect it came well after the sample. And for the record, if it was literally a 'watered down' sample, like with water from the tap, we'd have known it immediately because we've had kids try that too and nobody gets the temperature right. You always end up outside the acceptable bounds for the sample and it's an immediate rejection - do not pass go, do not send for analysis. If that was how this went down, I bet we'd know it.

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 12832797)

Unless things have recently surfaced, my understanding of the argument with the nurses was that it wasn't even over a test but rather he was trying to get paperwork/records (I believe related to his recent shoulder surgery).

And who the hell knows if your situation was the same as his. Maybe water WAS available to dilute the sample - that doesn't mean he used it and it's not his fault if the protocols were different where he took the test. Like I said, I'd be shocked if this was a result of dumping water in his piss cup; people just don't get that temp right and that kicks back immediately. I have to believe we'd know about it were that the case.

Originally Posted by Kiimosabi (Post 12832914)

This is the ONLY THING that would make it okay to not take a QB in the first in my opinion.

PLEASE DROP

Originally Posted by Halfcan (Post 12832793)

Last drug test I took- the nurse put a red dye packet in the toilet and instructed me Not to flush it. Also, she put safety tape over faucet so no water could come out.

If Foster was is a similar situation- why did he not say- No water was even available during testing to dilute this sample. When confirmed by the hospital- it would be a moot point.

As it stands now- it looks like he was trying to skirt the test, got into an argument with the nurses over it, was kicked out. Then the failed test comes back diluted. I guess NFL teams will make their own judgment if these excuses are plausible when added to the food poisoning story.

Originally Posted by Halfcan (Post 12832804)

Excellent point- there is usually a thermometer built into the cup. That is the first thing they check.

That is why the whole thing does not make much sense. Did he fail immediately or really thought he passed and was surprised by the news?

If no water was available to dilute, And the temperature was correct- it should go in his favor.

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup (Post 12832923)

He will and should drop WAY past the 27th pick.

Originally Posted by Urc Burry (Post 12834245)

Michael Lombardi-
Teams picking between 33-45 will need to make sure they are comfortable with R. Foster, cause he will be there.

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 12834252)

6 weeks ago the guy is considered a top 5 pick and the best player in the country at a position of excruciating need for us in both the near and long terms.

I'm sorry, but if that guy was there for us in the 20s, I think we'd be fools not to grab him. He's a very very good player.

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 12834252)

6 weeks ago the guy is considered a top 5 pick and the best player in the country at a position of excruciating need for us in both the near and long terms.

I'm sorry, but if that guy was there for us in the 20s, I think we'd be fools not to grab him. He's a very very good player.