Florio's point would have been stronger if he had emphasized that there is an element of truth to Fish's story - Steelers players likely use HGH, just as the Pats did violate league guidelines by filming from the sidelines, instead of a booth - but that the crime is common and/or minor and the only reason to focus on one team is partiality and timing.
Florio did a fairly good job pointing out how this story has obviously been selected because the Steelers are so relevant, with an upcoming AFCCG, but like the lawyer he is he focused on reasonable doubt as his main argument. The court of public opinion does not have double jeopordy protection - the Steelers will get "tried" for this crime many, many times until they are found guilty (or the story finally dies) - so going forward it is better to dismiss this on grounds of commonality (the Steelers aren't the only team exposed to HGH) than on reasonable doubt, which tends to disappear the longer the circus goes on and the more op-ed pieces get written in assent.
I suspect the reason ESPN likes localizing problems on a team basis is because it becomes a much clearer good vs. evil, us vs. them issue, and pissing off one team at a time with unfair reporting is a lot safer than pissing off the league office. 32 teams to pick on, only one football league.
