THE STEROID SCANDAL SI Writers • CNNMoney: Players' health should be priority • Donovan: Yankees in middle of storm again • Verducci: This problem won't go away • Taylor: Players should stand up to union • Layden: BALCO case puts stars at risk • Donovan: Baseball's numbers don't add up • Verducci: MLB's drug plan lacks punch • Fish: Steroid sleuth leads charge against THG • SI Special Report: Steroids in baseball • SI Flashback: Caminiti comes clean Latest News • Lawyers reiterate defense of Bonds • Report: Bonds, Giambi, Sheff got steroids • Smoltz calls for tougher drug testing • Kent: Was Babe Ruth on steroids? • BALCO lawyers say Bonds is clean

CHICAGO -- While the NFL feels its long-standing ban on anabolic steroids puts it well ahead of the curve in terms of testing for the new designer steroid THG (tetrahydrogestrinone), which it undoubtedly does compared to some other major professional sports, still unclear is whether the league's zero-tolerance policy toward the substance will impact the 2003 season in any real way.

In other words, with the NFL committed to testing previously gathered player urine samples for indications of THG, is it possible that some playoff-bound team could have 60 percent of its starting offensive line suspended for all of December, just as the regular season is building to a crescendo?

Many questions about how the league will handle the emergence of the THG controversy remain unanswered, including how the NFL might react if positive tests for the steroid are widespread in the coming weeks. Or even if testing for THG already has begun.

But on Wednesday, the first day of the league's two-day midseason owners meeting here, the chairman of the NFL's management council made it clear the league would make no distinction between THG and any other steroid, and that a player will not be able to use ignorance as an excuse -- even if THG has been marketed as dietary supplement and was only this week labeled an illegal steroid by the Food and Drug Administration.

"They claim [ignorance] every time we get a positive steroid test,'' said Harold Henderson, whose management council role makes him the league's liaison to the players union. "No, we could not accept that kind of explanation. 'Nobody knew it, somebody slipped it to them. It was in the salve they put on my knee.' There's always a story.

"It's a strict liability policy. You're responsible for what's in your body. The players are taught that from the minute they come into the league. You're responsible for what's in your body. Be careful.''

But the discussion regarding THG is in the embryonic stage in the NFL, and even some NFL owners seemed unaware that the league intends to view a positive test for THG just as it would any other steroid.

"I would like to see what kind of test we're talking about,'' Houston Texans owner Bob McNair said Wednesday. "I'm for keeping our athletes healthy and I want to do everything we can to avoid the use of any type of supplement or compound that has some long-term ill affect. I think that's in the best interest of the athlete and in the best interest of us. But we're still learning about certain compounds and I just think we have to be careful about what we do.

"You need to take appropriate action, but you don't want to do something unfairly that penalizes someone who was basically acting in good faith. I think that's the issue.''

Asked if there could be mitigating circumstances regarding a player's positive test for THG in the coming weeks, McNair said: "I think there could be. It's something that we need to learn more about.''

Even league insiders like Bucs general manager Rich McKay and Cowboys owner Jerry Jones said they know virtually nothing about how the league will approach THG testing, including how far back samples can be re-tested. Discussion of THG, McKay said, has yet to surface at these meetings.

"I'm assuming we will talk about it, but it has not been discussed,'' McKay said. "I don't know [if testing is going on right now]. We haven't had a lot of communication as to what those issues are. I've read more about it than I've heard about it coming from the league. There's more in the media than has been disseminated to the teams.

"This issue is too new. Remember, this is a process that involves the league office and also the union. It involves the medical directors of the teams and the union. You've got a lot of people working this issue as we speak, and I would be surprised if there are any hard decisions made.''

According to several league sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity, before the NFL would make any decisions on when players who test positive for THG would be suspended, it will first try to determine how widespread is the use of the steroid.

For example, if only three players would test positive, the league would likely hand out those four-game suspensions immediately, as a warning message to the rest of the NFL's players. But if the number of failed tests were much larger, say 33 players league wide, the NFL would likely then turn to the players union and negotiate an agreement whereby those suspensions wouldn't be effective until next season.

The reasoning? The NFL, as public relations savvy as any league going, isn't about to shoot itself in the foot by suspending dozens of players just as its playoff races are heating up.

"You're not going to blow up the playoff races by suspending a ton of guys in December,'' said one team official. "The league will know the answer to the question before it asks the question. That way it'll know how to react accordingly.''

Another topic that could complicate the discussions between the league management council and the NFLPA regarding testing for THG was raised Wednesday by Oakland defensive end Trace Armstrong, the union president. Armstrong told The Associated Press the union didn't think the NFL could retro-test previous urine samples, since some have been destroyed, creating an inequitable system of justice.

But NFLPA executive director Gene Upshaw quickly disputed Armstrong's contention that some samples might have been destroyed, and said the union is still in its early stages of coming to grips with testing for THG.

"We're still trying to get our arms around it [the issue of testing],'' Upshaw told the AP. "There's no doubt we believe it should be tested for. And there's no doubt we believe it should be on the banned list.''

Henderson said the league's position is that the union does not have to approve the re-testing for THG, but the NFL is trying to fully consult with the NFLPA regarding the testing process. "They may have a different position,'' he said. "We're in discussions [with the union] to try and resolve any differences....They're our partners in this policy. We're trying to not dictate the way it works, but get some agreement on it.''

NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue weighed in on the THG testing issue as well, saying: "Harold and Gene Upshaw are discussing this intensively and they'll continue to do that. This particular category of steroids has been on our prohibited list for quite some time. So Harold and Gene will work through this in a way that will strike a fair balance.''

Asked if the testing for THG is in place and has begun, Henderson set forth a rather vague timetable.

"Let me put it this way, it's a banned substance,'' he said. "It's a steroid. It's always been a banned substance. It was undetectable by a test until recently, and now it is, and we're testing for it. [We'll test] as soon as the lab can begin to test for it. We told them, it's a steroid. They should put it on the panel and test for it. They could be testing right now.''

The NFL doesn't know yet how long THG stays in a person's system, Henderson said, which means the league isn't sure how long it can test a previous urine sample and get accurate results. "We've never specified that, so that's still an open issue,'' Henderson said.

"But does it matter [how long it stays in somebody's system]? Should I be concerned about that? I'm not trying to be funny or wise about that. These are a lot of open issues and a lot of questions to think about. And we don't have clear, black and white answers to all of those issues. My position is that it's a steroid and we treat it exactly like we treat steroids. They're banned, they've always been banned, and we test for them. Whenever we have a test for them, we take action when we find positives.''

While the league is clearly trying to get a handle on the latest steroid issue to rear its head in sports, the truth is this: When it comes to the NFL and THG, plenty about the controversial new steroid remains TBD.

Don Banks covers pro football for SI.com.