The W
Views: 98327571
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
21.8.14 1107
The W - Football - Report: Several NFL players test Positive for Roids
This thread has 10 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 4.25
Pages: 1
(801 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (6 total)
CajunMan
Boudin blanc
No longer registered








Since: 2.1.02
From: Give me a Title shot!

Since last post: 1036 days
Last activity: 173 days
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.70
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3661845

Wow look like a major bust here if this report is true. Many of these players are fan-favorites. We will have to see how the NFL responds to this in the coming days.
Promote this thread!
redsoxnation
Scrapple








Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 416 days
Last activity: 416 days
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.79
If I'm the players I'd probably drop the appeal after this week and get the 4 games over with if their team is in playoff contention. Steroid suspensions blow over in the NFL, but if you are suspended for a late season game or playoff game, the fan base will turn on you.
Mr. Boffo
Scrapple








Since: 24.3.02
From: Oshkosh, WI

Since last post: 388 days
Last activity: 349 days
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.82
If I understand the article correctly, the substance in question is not in itself a steroid, but rather a drug that reduces water levels in the body. It therefore might be useful to people trying to make weight (I believe some teams set weight limits for their players), but can also be used to mask other drug use. If that is the case then I have two thoughts. One, they deserve to be suspended, because in today's modern athletic world, you need to check to make sure that the drugs that you are using are ok. Two, while it's true that steroid suspensions seem to be easily forgotten in the NFL (eg Shawne Merriman making it to the Pro Bowl in a season in which he served a suspension), let's not tar and feather them all just yet. This in and of itself (assuming I understand the article correctly) is not necessarily proof of steroid use, even though it involves a banned substance.
StingArmy
Andouille








Since: 3.5.03
From: Georgia bred, you can tell by my Hawk jersey

Since last post: 11 days
Last activity: 8 days
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.45
    Originally posted by Mr. Boffo
    If I understand the article correctly, the substance in question is not in itself a steroid, but rather a drug that reduces water levels in the body. It therefore might be useful to people trying to make weight (I believe some teams set weight limits for their players), but can also be used to mask other drug use.

Right. I think the most likely uses here for the "water pills" some of these players allegedly used were either masking use of another drug or (more benign but also damnable) draining excess fluid from the body. The latter could be for weight loss like you suggested, but I think it's far more likely that it'd be used to drain fluid buildup from injuries.

- StingArmy
dMr
Andouille








Since: 2.11.02
From: Edinburgh, Scotland

Since last post: 43 days
Last activity: 17 hours
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.08
    Originally posted by Mr. Boffo
    Two, while it's true that steroid suspensions seem to be easily forgotten in the NFL (eg Shawne Merriman making it to the Pro Bowl in a season in which he served a suspension), let's not tar and feather them all just yet. This in and of itself (assuming I understand the article correctly) is not necessarily proof of steroid use, even though it involves a banned substance.


I'm not sure I see a major difference. They've (allegedly) taken a banned substance either to:

1. Mask steroid use (which improves performance).
2. Lose weight (and thus improve performance) or
3. Heal faster from injury (and thus improve performance, or allow them to perform at all).

While one may be worse in some people's eyes than the others at the end of the day these players have taken a banned substance to improve their performance in some shape or form and deserve whatever suspension and stigma comes with that in my opinion.

And like you say, use of banned substances appears to be so quickly forgotten in the NFL that the tarring and feathering barely even matters.
Mr. Boffo
Scrapple








Since: 24.3.02
From: Oshkosh, WI

Since last post: 388 days
Last activity: 349 days
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.82
Oh, I agree, dMr. I'm not saying they shouldn't get punished. I guess it's a matter of semantics in that I'd prefer that they not get listed as testing positive for steroids, rather that they tested positive for a banned substance. It may be a stupid distinction, but that's how I feel.
Thread rated: 4.25
Pages: 1
Thread ahead: The W Survival League: 2008 style (Week 8)
Next thread: 2008 College Football Week 8
Previous thread: Potential BCS chaos
(801 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Hmmm...it's hard to really even answer that, as he's was hurt more this season than at any time I can remember, plus teams spent most of their time running on the Iggles anyway.
- shockdown, Troy Vincent in Carolina Blue? (2004)
Related threads: NFL Week 7 - NFL Playoff Seedings After WEEK 6 - NFL Playoff Seedings After Week 4 - More...
The W - Football - Report: Several NFL players test Positive for RoidsRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.167 seconds.