Mitchell Investigation

Demi · Post by **Demi** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 8:19 pm

I believe they have just as bad a problem but have had a better track record so they get a pass

Well yeah, when you've actually tested for, and punished players for using, you'll get more of a pass then if you just ignore it, don't punish, or test.

There's been many documented case of use in the NFL including Merriman last year (who still gets a national commercial and people love, we don't see that with Bonds who hasn't even failed a test), Bill Romanoski (who was part of BALCO but people ignore), Lyle Alzado, Chris Cooper (BALCO), Rodney Harrison (HGH), Barret Robbins, Dana Stubblefield (BALCO), Mike Golic.

I didn't recall Merriman claiming to have thought he was rubbing arthritis cream and taking flaxseed either. Merrimen tested positive, was suspended. Bonds was brought before a panel investigating and lied through his teeth, and still has yet to miss a single game. People don't "ignore" it, they just don't care about a washed up has been linebacker with mental issues. I heard the 70s steelers used roids, should we be all over that?

wang_chi7 · Post by **wang_chi7** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 8:35 pm

vikingman wrote:I don't think they cared about getting caught as they all knew that the Commish wouldn't do anything about it. It will be interesting to see what they do about this now. Baseball is in a downhill spiral and IMO is not the American past time anymore and that is a shame. Don't get me wrong I will still follow my Cubs (don't laugh everyone) they will win a WORLD SERIES before I die.

Thats probably true, Selig has been a complete and utter joke of a Commish, and for more than this issue. I'm glad to hear he said he will look at each name mentioned case by case and decide on penalties even though Mitchell recommended letting the past be the past and that it would anger the MLBPA, but we'll see if he was just saying that.

wang_chi7 · Post by **wang_chi7** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 8:44 pm

Demi wrote: Well yeah, when you've actually tested for, and punished players for using, you'll get more of a pass then if you just ignore it, don't punish, or test.
I didn't recall Merriman claiming to have thought he was rubbing arthritis cream and taking flaxseed either. Merrimen tested positive, was suspended. Bonds was brought before a panel investigating and lied through his teeth, and still has yet to miss a single game. People don't "ignore" it, they just don't care about a washed up has been linebacker with mental issues. I heard the 70s steelers used roids, should we be all over that?

Baseball is testing now, they (sort of) admitted past mistakes and are now giving out stiffer punishments than even the NFL is. Banning amphetamines was also a huge step too, especially considering they've been used since at least the 60's to get thru the long season. They should get (some) more of the bad publicity, but the fact is that both sports have a serious problem but only baseball is being talked about.

Thats true that Bond has been a liar and that hurts his rep, but he would still be hated even if he admitted it because he broke a sacred record by cheating. Giambi did just as much admitting as Merriman but is still hated and looked at first as a cheater and second a slugger. Merriman, for most people, is a ferocious LB first and a cheater second. The double standard is wrong.

Yes, people ignore it. Much of that has to do with the media, but I bet if a poll was taken a much smaller percent of people would believe the NFL has users and that there really isn't a problem in the same breath as baseball. They need to be taking a bigger brunt of this controversy, but hardly are even spoken of. Why don't people care that Romo and Merriman cheat but care if Bonds and Canseco do? Its because the first group only hit other individuals while the other group hit balls out of a park at alarming rates. You could compare Romo to Canseco as they both were washed up mental cases during the controversy, but Canseco was a huge story and Romo was only a footnote in the BALCO case.

Colinito · Post by **Colinito** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 9:21 pm

I want to clarify that steroids aren't used to move faster, hit harder etc.

2 reasons:
repair muscle tissue faster (to get bigger faster)
recover from injury faster

There is a third effect, which is increased aggression, which also helps in the weight room, and may come in handy in a game in the NFL.

Another thing to consider is that you don't lose muscle mass after you stop, so many football players use it in college (or even high school) where they are less likely to be tested (or there are institutional methods to beat tests). Shawne Merriman's problem was that he started too late--- as the draft approached, and many scrutinizing eyes saw him get huge in a short amount of time.

I realize I am on an internet message board here, so I don't want to say too much, but based on what I have experienced I would say that steroid use by football players at all levels is widespread.

Why do they endure less scrutiny? Is it because football is rough and people expect it? Is it because it's a team sport with less emphasis on individual records?

I don't know, but there's a disconnect there.

DanAS1 · Post by **DanAS1** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 9:26 pm

Colinito wrote:
Why do they endure less scrutiny? Is it because football is rough and people expect it? Is it because it's a team sport with less emphasis on individual records?

I don't know, but there's a disconnect there.

Good questions. I almost wonder if it is expected in football given the nature of the sport. If so, that would be pretty pathetic, wouldn't it?

Hunter Morrow · Post by **Hunter Morrow** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 9:31 pm

Really, Merriman is washed up? Didn't he make the Pro Bowl last year and isn't he still meastacular?
Well, we all know Clemens likes it in the butt now.
Is there going to be outrage and hatred similar to what people have against Bonds towards Clemens and the others? There ought to be.

wang_chi7 · Post by **wang_chi7** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 9:37 pm

Colinito wrote:I want to clarify that steroids aren't used to move faster, hit harder etc.

2 reasons:
repair muscle tissue faster (to get bigger faster)
recover from injury faster

There is a third effect, which is increased aggression, which also helps in the weight room, and may come in handy in a game in the NFL.

Another thing to consider is that you don't lose muscle mass after you stop, so many football players use it in college (or even high school) where they are less likely to be tested (or there are institutional methods to beat tests). Shawne Merriman's problem was that he started too late--- as the draft approached, and many scrutinizing eyes saw him get huge in a short amount of time.

I realize I am on an internet message board here, so I don't want to say too much, but based on what I have experienced I would say that steroid use by football players at all levels is widespread.

Why do they endure less scrutiny? Is it because football is rough and people expect it? Is it because it's a team sport with less emphasis on individual records?

I don't know, but there's a disconnect there.

Great post. I should have been more specific with the run faster hit harder thing; HGH and steriods have been used by sprinters for speed and many record breakers have been cheaters. Its probably because of the ability to build muscle strength (mainly in the legs.) The hit harder I just assume because the user is now stronger and more aggressive.

I would argue that you would lose muscle mass if you stop using. This is because of atrophy. If you stopped using but still were active in the weight room you would keep much of it (I assume), but would still lose the excess muscle mass.

I totally think the reasons you listed are why the NFL gets a pass; people just don't care because of those points. Football also doesn't have the romanticism that baseball does and its very hard to compare players of different eras in football; but in baseball people don't want cheaters passing Ruth, Aaron, Williams, Cy Young, Bob Gibson, Spahn, etc. in the record books.

Demi · Post by **Demi** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 9:59 pm

I would argue that you would lose muscle mass if you stop using. This is because of atrophy. If you stopped using but still were active in the weight room you would keep much of it (I assume), but would still lose the excess muscle mass.

Although from what I understand there are a number of factors as far as the decrease in "size" more so then actual muscle loss.

I always knew clemens was a dirty juicer. I though Schillings name would be in there too, but then Mitchell is a Sox guy.

Colinito · Post by **Colinito** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 10:41 pm

Demi, PFT did do that picture there, but they had to retract it (albeit discreetly

) In the above picture Merriman's head is pasted on another guy's body...by the NFL, I forget why they did it, some benign reason...but true story.

And I stand by the fact that you don't lose much after you stop. In fact, some of the most common steroid use is 1-2 cycles (cycle is about a month depending on the actual steroid used) to gain the bulk and then enjoy it without fear of getting caught. Maybe there's a small drop off, but that drop off might actually be good, as in a streamlining effect.

wang_chi7 · Post by **wang_chi7** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 10:50 pm

Demi wrote:I always knew clemens was a dirty juicer. I though Schillings name would be in there too, but then Mitchell is a Sox guy.

I've been pointing at Clemens for years, pitchers shouldn't be as effective in their 40s as he has been, plus he has the juicer's jaw. I am a little less skeptical of Schilling, but do wonder. Having a guy with interest in the BoSox really bugged me as I will always question if guys like Ortiz, Manny, Damon got passes because they helped win a title in Boston.

Demi · Post by **Demi** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:23 pm

Demi, PFT did do that picture there, but they had to retract it (albeit discreetly Very Happy ) In the above picture Merriman's head is pasted on another guy's body...by the NFL, I forget why they did it, some benign reason...but true story.

Ah, never heard that. There are plenty of examples of ex-PrideFC fighters who ended up in the UFC that it's pretty apparent on.

Post by **glg** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:37 pm

wang_chi7 wrote:Baseball is testing now, they (sort of) admitted past mistakes and are now giving out stiffer punishments than even the NFL is.

IINM, baseball is still not doing random in-season tests. The NFL is. The league can walk up to any player in-season at any time, tell them to drop trou and give a sample. Out-of-season, the player has to report within a fairly short period of time (like 4 hours or something).

wang_chi7 · Post by **wang_chi7** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:45 pm

glg wrote: IINM, baseball is still not doing random in-season tests. The NFL is. The league can walk up to any player in-season at any time, tell them to drop trou and give a sample. Out-of-season, the player has to report within a fairly short period of time (like 4 hours or something).

Really? I didn't know they didn't test during the season. I knew they tested less frequently than the NFL (but give out a bigger penalty if caught), but didn't realize they didn't test in season.

Post by **glg** » Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:05 am

wang_chi7 wrote:Really? I didn't know they didn't test during the season. I knew they tested less frequently than the NFL (but give out a bigger penalty if caught), but didn't realize they didn't test in season.

They do test, but I don't think it's anywhere near as random and unannounced as the NFL.

wang_chi7 · Post by **wang_chi7** » Fri Dec 14, 2007 1:44 am

glg wrote: They do test, but I don't think it's anywhere near as random and unannounced as the NFL.

That probably won't change as long as Bud is still in charge unfortunately. Up until recently teams were giving players 24 hours notice of the tests, fortunately they put a stop to that.