OT: Brian Cushing suspended four games for PEDs

[VJCPatriot]

There's a Steelers fan on the CBS Sports forum arguing that Spygate is worse than both steroids AND Big Ben's behavior...

Yeah... because Roiding up and Raping women is a lot worse than operating a video camera!! NOT! :bricks:

 

[Sicilian]

There's a Steelers fan on the CBS Sports forum arguing that Spygate is worse than both steroids AND Big Ben's behavior...

Perspective is one of the most important (and also one of the least sought) virtues the human mind can have.

Without it, no single instance of anything makes any sense, and yet no one wants it because it messes with their emotion based arguments.

 

[furley]

New Orleans Saints coach Jim Haslett apologized to the Pittsburgh Steelers on Thursday for saying that team's use of steroids during its Super Bowl championship seasons in the 1970s popularized the drug in the NFL.

"I have a lot of respect for that team, that organization and Mr. (Dan) Rooney," Haslett said. "That's just what we believed when I played. And, later, one of their players admitted using steroids. But I didn't mean to cause them any harm."

The admission by Steve Courson, a part-time starter on Pittsburgh's last Super Bowl title team in 1979, was one reason Haslett felt rumors about the Steelers' steroid use were true.

Courson has blamed a heart condition on steroid use. Courson also said that teammates such as Jack Ham and Jack Lambert adamantly refused to use them.

Steelers owner Dan Rooney, who ran the team during the 1970s, denied the Steelers pioneered steroid use in the NFL.

Haslett who played in Buffalo from 1979 to 1985, and finished his career in 1987 with the New York Jets, admitted Wednesday that he experimented with steroids, believing he needed them to keep up with the many players he felt used them.

The NFL banned their use and began testing for steroids in 1987, but players weren't suspended for using them until 1989. The league started using random, year-round drug testing in 1990.

Haslett said he talked about steroid use in his day to point out how far the NFL had come, not to cast aspersions on anyone.

Haslett apologizes for implicating Steelers - NFL - ESPN

 

[BostonPatriot]

Haslett apologizes for implicating Steelers - NFL - ESPN

What he said most likely true.

I love how some fans are shocked by all the steriod use in the NFL. I'd say at least 50% (probably much more) of players have used something illegal over the course of their career(s). If testing wasn't such a joke, you would see players getting popped left and right.

Football is the sport where steriods give the athletes the most benefit. It's such a physical game, and your body takes such a pounding, steriods are perfect to aid with recovery and to increase lean muscle tissue and power. Power = explosion, which as you know, is extremly important in football.

 

[TrueBeliever]

According to this article, he might just lose the DROY:

Cushing could lose Defensive Rookie of the Year award - Shutdown Corner - NFL Blog - Yahoo! Sports

 

[eom]

I think cushing could stand to lose a couple million in escalators.

 

[WhiZa]

Here's how voting went down last year. It would be pretty funny if they gave the award to former teammate Matthews instead

1. Houston linebacker Brian Cushing (39 votes)
2. Buffalo safety Jairus Byrd (6)
3. Green Bay linebacker Clay Matthews (3)
4. Washington linebacker Brian Orakpo (2)

 

[furley]

He makes a good point here.

If the Associated Press's revote winds up bestowing the award to someone besides Cushing, four months after he first won it, where's the equity of punishment and sense of fairness we would all want, at least in light of the cases of Julius Peppers in 2002 or Shawne Merriman in 2005? Both were honored as NFL Defensive Rookie of the Year despite serving league suspensions for drug use that presumably could have enhanced their rookie performances. Peppers's suspension came at the end of his rookie year of 2002, while Merriman's was announced early in the 2006 season, bringing into question his stellar play of his 2005 debut.

I have one of the votes that has to be re-cast by noon Wednesday, and unless something dramatic alters the facts as I know them, I plan on voting Cushing the league's defensive rookie of the year, just as I did in January. Given that Cushing's original margin over second-place finisher Jairus Byrd of Buffalo was a whopping 39-6, landslide territory, I'd be shocked if there's a new winner this time around. But the margin isn't really the point that makes or breaks this argument.

Brian Cushing still gets my vote in AP award revote - Don Banks - SI.com

 

[TrueBeliever]

How does the random testing work? Does everyone get tested once a year? That would be a lot of tests, eh. Is it just random, X number of players get tested each week?

 

[PatsChamp88]

Suspended LB Brian Cushing's positive test last September was reportedly for abnormally elevated levels of "hCG" -- a non-steroidal substance produced naturally by the body.

The catch is, it's also a popular combo agent during anabolic steroid cycling, and the same thing Manny Ramirez was suspended for in 2009. When injected, hCG can restore testicular size (which is affected by steroids), in addition to produce testosterone. Cushing may not have tested positive for 'roids, but it's pretty clear something isn't right. As SI's Ross Tucker noted Monday, many players use PEDs during the offseason, when their chances of being tested are down. They then maintain the gains during the season.

Brian Cushing

Twitter / Adam Schefter: Here it is: Brian Cushing ...

 

[dryheat44]

Here's what troubles me: Cushing failed that test in September. So why was he allowed to play all year, and presumably keep doing what he was doing?

Let's just say the Texas won the Super Bowl 24-21 over the Saints. Super Bowl MVP Brian Cushing had 15 tackles, two sacks, and an interception. Two weeks previous they beat the Ravens 17-16 in the AFCC, with the winning margin coming on a Cushing strip-sack and fumble recovery TD. Now this story breaks. If I was Saints or Ravens management, I'd be screaming bloody murder that the NFL allowed a known violator to play all season, and continue to make on-field contributions to a Super Bowl winning team. Would the NFL have the balls to strip their Championship?

Or to say it another way, what if it were Darren Sharper instead of Cushing who failed a test in September? I think the NFL dropped the ball here.

Oh, and unless you believe that the Texans organization gave Cushing the PEDs, or at the very least knew about it, calling the organization a bunch of cheaters and deserving of a forfeited draft pick is ludicrous.

 

[RodThePat]

I watch football under the assumption that 80% of players are/were on some kind of performance enhancer. Be it over the counter stuff, HGH, or even good old 'roids. Those who get caught were dumb and careless, that's the bottomline.

If you guys think that the majority of players are clean, you're out of your minds. I can see QBs and Kickers beind mostly clean, but aside from that I am suspicious of every player. When your carreer hinges on producing at a high level in a physical sport, you better bet most people would be more than willing to take performance enhancers if that meant more production, less injuries and more money.

 

[PatsChamp88]

Here's what troubles me: Cushing failed that test in September. So why was he allowed to play all year, and presumably keep doing what he was doing?

Exactly! Maybe the NFL doesn't have much have much faith in it's testing system or is scared to ban someone during the season because it might have more of an impact.

 

[letekro]

I watch football under the assumption that 80% of players are/were on some kind of performance enhancer. Be it over the counter stuff, HGH, or even good old 'roids. Those who get caught were dumb and careless, that's the bottomline.

If you guys think that the majority of players are clean, you're out of your minds. I can see QBs and Kickers beind mostly clean, but aside from that I am suspicious of every player. When your carreer hinges on producing at a high level in a physical sport, you better bet most people would be more than willing to take performance enhancers if that meant more production, less injuries and more money.

Exactly right, but why would you exempt kickers? Don't forget Todd Sauerbrun.

 

[TrueBeliever]

I watch football under the assumption that 80% of players are/were on some kind of performance enhancer.

Just out of curiosity, are you referring just to the NFL or to college football as well? Does the NCAA do a lot of testing too?

 

[eom]

Here's what troubles me: Cushing failed that test in September. So why was he allowed to play all year, and presumably keep doing what he was doing?

because he's in a union and there's an appeals process.
wth the appeals process takes so long, I have no idea, but how long has the starcaps thing been dragging out?

I could make the case that if you deprive some innocent guy his rightful appeal and he's not on the superbowl field to make his strip sack then the world should be outraged.
if testing was perfect then why allow appeals to begin with?

 

[dryheat44]

because he's in a union and there's an appeals process.
wth the appeals process takes so long, I have no idea, but how long has the starcaps thing been dragging out?

I could make the case that if you deprive some innocent guy his rightful appeal and he's not on the superbowl field to make his strip sack then the world should be outraged.
if testing was perfect then why allow appeals to begin with?

I don't think there is an appeals process. The player is responsible for what goes into his body -- zero tolerance. His only recourse is to sue the manufacturer/prescriber.

The Starcaps thing has been dragging out only because the CBA is contradictory to Minnesota State Law. The Saints players were suspended immediately, although Goodell has waited until the Minnesota thing to be settled before enforcing.

 

[eom]

I don't think there is an appeals process.

what?

dude.....

 

[MoLewisrocks]

This is an excellent piece by a guy who played the game. I agree with his take on the entire situation. And I thought this quote was pretty telling in Cushing's case:

Maybe it is the water in Jersey. One former USC teammate of Cushing once told me that he strongly suspected that Cushing was taking some type of PED. "I don't know for sure that he takes anything," the player said, "but every time he goes back to New Jersey for a while over the summer and then comes back to Los Angeles he looks like a different person. It is unreal."

Brian Cushing's positive test exposes problems in NFL - Ross Tucker - SI.com

 

[dryheat44]

This is an excellent piece by a guy who played the game. I agree with his take on the entire situation. And I thought this quote was pretty telling in Cushing's case:




Brian Cushing's positive test exposes problems in NFL - Ross Tucker - SI.com

Tucker's first paragraph is alarming. The NFL allowed the appeal of a September test to carry on until February?! Especially since 1) a banned substance suspension has to my knowledge ever been overturned or reduced, and I don't see where the mechanics are to do so, and 2) DeMaurice Smith and the NFLPA have come out in favor of suspensions for banned substances, including this case.

I have a hard time taking the NFL's stance on PEDs seriously when they allowed a positive player play for the entire season while dragging their heels on a needless appeal.