PDA

View Full Version : Is Shawne Merriman Worthy of DPOY?


bigbluedefense
12-11-2006, 10:48 AM
He leads the league in sacks and was suspended 4 games. Think about that. And he's a beast against the run, he forced 2 fumbles yesterday, he can do it all.

When he's on the field, he's easily been the most dynamic defender in the league this year.

But, does he deserve DPOY? He was afterall, suspended 4 games for substance abuse.

But if you look at his work, and not the off field problems, he's been the best defender in the league this year. Should he get it?

Shane P. Hallam
12-11-2006, 10:49 AM
No, you get suspended, you don't win, plain and simple.

ShadowPanther
12-11-2006, 11:21 AM
No, you get suspended, you don't win, plain and simple.

I agree. It should go to him but he disqualified himself. He will win one of two more so don't worry.

CC.SD
12-11-2006, 11:46 AM
Just keep in mind that if he doesn't get it, whoever does get it will essentially be a poser unless their name is Urlacher. No defensive player has been more dominant on the field than Shawne this year, and the numbers don't even tell the whole story. He's forced interceptions, ruined countless plays with his constant pressure, and to boot nobody runs on him.

That said, he won't get it. No dice. 4 game suspension.




Seriously watch this guy fly around it's insane. He had a flying leap from like twenty feet away to club somebody Igor had already mostly taken down.

bigbluedefense
12-11-2006, 11:49 AM
Just keep in mind that if he doesn't get it, whoever does get it will essentially be a poser unless their name is Urlacher. No defensive player has been more dominant on the field than Shawne this year, and the numbers don't even tell the whole story. He's forced interceptions, ruined countless plays with his constant pressure, and to boot nobody runs on him.

That said, he won't get it. No dice. 4 game suspension.




Seriously watch this guy fly around it's insane. He had a flying leap from like twenty feet away to club somebody Igor had already mostly taken down.

He's the most dynamic rushbacker Ive seen since Derrick Thomas. If he works on his pass coverage, he could be a mini Lawrence Taylor. He is that dominant. Only time will tell if he can maintain this type of play throughout his career, but right here right now I see some LT in him.

P-L
12-11-2006, 11:50 AM
I think he should get it, but he won't.

tom
12-11-2006, 12:01 PM
no way... He's not been good enough to over-come the substance abuse thing-a-ma-jig.

Had he been the clearcut best defensive player in the league, then I would have thought he deserved it, but with the way Urlacher, Bailey, and Taylor have been playing, I don't think he should get it

Vikings Fan
12-11-2006, 12:05 PM
Jason Taylor will get it.

bigbluedefense
12-11-2006, 12:11 PM
I don't think he should get it either because of the substance abuse. But had it not been for that, he'd easily be the front runner in my opinion.

Forget the stats, watch him play. He's a gamechanger. He makes special plays, and he's all over the place.

Still, I'll be curious to see how he performs next year.

TPFKA#1SaintsFan
12-11-2006, 12:16 PM
Jason Taylor will get it.

QFT.

Shane P. Hallam
12-11-2006, 12:27 PM
Just keep in mind that if he doesn't get it, whoever does get it will essentially be a poser unless their name is Urlacher. No defensive player has been more dominant on the field than Shawne this year, and the numbers don't even tell the whole story. He's forced interceptions, ruined countless plays with his constant pressure, and to boot nobody runs on him.

That said, he won't get it. No dice. 4 game suspension.




Seriously watch this guy fly around it's insane. He had a flying leap from like twenty feet away to club somebody Igor had already mostly taken down.

Wrong. Don't be a homer, Jason Taylor has been dominant this year too and he deserves it.

CC.SD
12-11-2006, 12:34 PM
I just have a problem with giving it to a guy who didn't lead his team to the playoffs.

Shane P. Hallam
12-11-2006, 01:04 PM
I just have a problem with giving it to a guy who didn't lead his team to the playoffs.

And Merriman was out for four games.

For DROY, the whole playoff thing doesn't quite work since it is more unit. Where as for OROY, a RB or QB can really do it themselves and put points on the board.

Windy
12-11-2006, 01:07 PM
I personally dont like Jason Taylor but you cant look past his season this year. Even if he didnt lead his team to the playoffs at least he didnt cheat.

marks01234
12-11-2006, 01:15 PM
Steriods or not, I still would give it to Jason Taylor.

1. Jason Taylor
2. Champ Bailey
3. Merriman

CC.SD
12-11-2006, 01:16 PM
I just have a problem with giving it to a guy who didn't lead his team to the playoffs.

And Merriman was out for four games.

For DROY, the whole playoff thing doesn't quite work since it is more unit. Where as for OROY, a RB or QB can really do it themselves and put points on the board.

The difference is, I already said Merriman shouldn't get it, so I don't know why you'd mention him in reference to JT.

and it's D P O Y unless they are rookies.

Finsfan79
12-11-2006, 01:31 PM
I just have a problem with giving it to a guy who didn't lead his team to the playoffs.

And Merriman was out for four games.

For DROY, the whole playoff thing doesn't quite work since it is more unit. Where as for OROY, a RB or QB can really do it themselves and put points on the board.

The difference is, I already said Merriman shouldn't get it, so I don't know why you'd mention him in reference to JT.

and it's D P O Y unless they are rookies.

Player yes as in not Team so really going to the playoffs doesnt matter. Look at Ed Reed he won it and they didnt make the playoffs that year I believe.

Jason Taylor has been dominant this year and doesnt need to be a lying cheater to be good. Unlike Bonds, Big Mac and this merriman and castillo for SD. Perhaps they shared their roids?

MagnumGator
12-11-2006, 01:45 PM
Does anyone want to make a definitive statement about the size of Merriman's arms now comapred to last year? I thought he looked smaller yesterday but maybe it's just me.

ShutDwn
12-11-2006, 02:27 PM
No, he has been on roids this season, just because he was out four games doesn't mean his strength and speed from using them is gone.


Also, no, he can't do it all, he never drops back and isn't really good enough to even consider that. His skill pass rusher masks that because their is no point in dropping him back.

nobodyinparticular
12-11-2006, 02:51 PM
http://www.supplements101.com/images/promatrix/box-bottle.gif

No.

nobodyinparticular
12-11-2006, 02:52 PM
http://www.narconon.ca/images/steroids.jpg

No.

12-11-2006, 02:53 PM
No, you get suspended, you don't win, plain and simple.

San Diego Chicken
12-11-2006, 03:14 PM
Yes. Steroid rumors didn't keep Bonds from winning seven MVP's. It isn't a man of the year award. The question is, is he worthy of the DPOY award and the answer is plainly yes. That so many people voted no is just biased and stupid. Get over yourselves.

GSOT
12-11-2006, 03:24 PM
No, you get suspended, you don't win, plain and simple.
Ditto....

bearsfan_51
12-11-2006, 03:27 PM
Yes. Steroid rumors didn't keep Bonds from winning seven MVP's. It isn't a man of the year award. The question is, is he worthy of the DPOY award and the answer is plainly yes. That so many people voted no is just biased and stupid. Get over yourselves.
I say no (although I didn't vote) because I don't think he deserves it, it has nothing to do with steroids. If you miss 1/4th of the season, I don't care how well you play the other 12, you don't deserve it, I don't care if it's because you're on crack or your hurt your foot bowling.

Plus, he's not the leader of his team, and he's at least partially responsible for one the Chargers only two losses this year (trying to decapitate Todd Heap at the 2 yard line rather than simply tackling him).

Merriman is a tremendous player, and likely will win the award sometime in his career, but not this year.

SuperMcGee
12-11-2006, 03:31 PM
wow, schobel is tied for the league lead in sacks. nice
London Fletcher top 5 dpoy candidate

All Bills aside, Taylor should win it

bigbluedefense
12-11-2006, 03:34 PM
wow, schobel is tied for the league lead in sacks. nice
London Fletcher top 5 dpoy candidate

All Bills aside, Taylor should win it

It didn't wind up in a sack, but did you see this one play?

The commentators go "Dbrick is having his hands full with Schobel" and the very next play, Schobel absolutely slams Dbrick on the floor and goes right at Pennington who threw it away to avoid a sack.

That was crazy...he destroyed Dbrick yesterday.

And Im starting to turn the corner on Schobel...he's been very good this year and last year.

I mentioned Merriman and not Schobel because Merriman did it with 4 less games, and as a Rushbacker.

And yes, Fletcher is like Zach Thomas...no love for a great player.

San Diego Chicken
12-11-2006, 03:39 PM
Yes. Steroid rumors didn't keep Bonds from winning seven MVP's. It isn't a man of the year award. The question is, is he worthy of the DPOY award and the answer is plainly yes. That so many people voted no is just biased and stupid. Get over yourselves.
I say no (although I didn't vote) because I don't think he deserves it, it has nothing to do with steroids. If you miss 1/4th of the season, I don't care how well you play the other 12, you don't deserve it, I don't care if it's because you're on crack or your hurt your foot bowling.

Plus, he's not the leader of his team, and he's at least partially responsible for one the Chargers only two losses this year (trying to decapitate Todd Heap at the 2 yard line rather than simply tackling him).

Merriman is a tremendous player, and likely will win the award sometime in his career, but not this year.

No offense, but I think that is a ridiculously dumb qualifier that a player must play in all of his team's games to win a major award. He's played in enough games to tie for the league lead in sacks. I don't know what else the guy needs to do.

To clarify, the topic said is Shawne Merriman worthy of DPOY and that is yes. Should he win it is up for debate, but he should without a doubt be in the mix. Anything less is biased nonsense.

Shiver
12-11-2006, 03:41 PM
It didn't wind up in a sack, but did you see this one play?

The commentators go "Dbrick is having his hands full with Schobel" and the very next play, Schobel absolutely slams Dbrick on the floor and goes right at Pennington who threw it away to avoid a sack.

That was crazy...he destroyed Dbrick yesterday.


Yeah I flipped over and saw that play. It lends some credence to the concern some had over D'Brick before the draft, his lean build leaving him vunerable to power rushes.

Moses
12-11-2006, 03:41 PM
Yes. Steroid rumors didn't keep Bonds from winning seven MVP's. It isn't a man of the year award. The question is, is he worthy of the DPOY award and the answer is plainly yes. That so many people voted no is just biased and stupid. Get over yourselves.
I say no (although I didn't vote) because I don't think he deserves it, it has nothing to do with steroids. If you miss 1/4th of the season, I don't care how well you play the other 12, you don't deserve it, I don't care if it's because you're on crack or your hurt your foot bowling.

Plus, he's not the leader of his team, and he's at least partially responsible for one the Chargers only two losses this year (trying to decapitate Todd Heap at the 2 yard line rather than simply tackling him).

Merriman is a tremendous player, and likely will win the award sometime in his career, but not this year.

No offense, but I think that is a ridiculously dumb qualifier that a player must play in all of his team's games to win a major award. He's played in enough games to tie for the league lead in sacks. I don't know what else the guy needs to do.

To clarify, the topic said is Shawne Merriman worthy of DPOY and that is yes. Should he win it is up for debate, but he should without a doubt be in the mix. Anything less is biased nonsense.

I can't see somebody who was suspended for violating the substance abuse policy winning the DPOY award. It just won't happen.

12-11-2006, 03:42 PM
His season would be worthy of it if Jason Taylor wasn't so amazing. He is a bit overrated by the media IMO however. I heard a guy on the radio this morning saying he was going to be better than Lawrence Taylor. :lol: A little too early to be calling him the greatest defensive player of all time.

SuperMcGee
12-11-2006, 03:48 PM
wow, schobel is tied for the league lead in sacks. nice
London Fletcher top 5 dpoy candidate

All Bills aside, Taylor should win it

It didn't wind up in a sack, but did you see this one play?

The commentators go "Dbrick is having his hands full with Schobel" and the very next play, Schobel absolutely slams Dbrick on the floor and goes right at Pennington who threw it away to avoid a sack.

That was crazy...he destroyed Dbrick yesterday.

And Im starting to turn the corner on Schobel...he's been very good this year and last year.

I mentioned Merriman and not Schobel because Merriman did it with 4 less games, and as a Rushbacker.

And yes, Fletcher is like Zach Thomas...no love for a great player.

I only brought up Schobel because I just saw the stat and it seemed relevant, but yeah he had an amazing game yesterday.

San Diego Chicken
12-11-2006, 03:50 PM
Yes. Steroid rumors didn't keep Bonds from winning seven MVP's. It isn't a man of the year award. The question is, is he worthy of the DPOY award and the answer is plainly yes. That so many people voted no is just biased and stupid. Get over yourselves.
I say no (although I didn't vote) because I don't think he deserves it, it has nothing to do with steroids. If you miss 1/4th of the season, I don't care how well you play the other 12, you don't deserve it, I don't care if it's because you're on crack or your hurt your foot bowling.

Plus, he's not the leader of his team, and he's at least partially responsible for one the Chargers only two losses this year (trying to decapitate Todd Heap at the 2 yard line rather than simply tackling him).

Merriman is a tremendous player, and likely will win the award sometime in his career, but not this year.

No offense, but I think that is a ridiculously dumb qualifier that a player must play in all of his team's games to win a major award. He's played in enough games to tie for the league lead in sacks. I don't know what else the guy needs to do.

To clarify, the topic said is Shawne Merriman worthy of DPOY and that is yes. Should he win it is up for debate, but he should without a doubt be in the mix. Anything less is biased nonsense.

I can't see somebody who was suspended for violating the substance abuse policy winning the DPOY award. It just won't happen.

If that is the only thing keeping him from winning it, the award itself is a farce. It's not a man of the year award.

smittyjs
12-11-2006, 04:03 PM
No

Ace
12-11-2006, 04:03 PM
Just keep in mind that if he doesn't get it, whoever does get it will essentially be a poser unless their name is Urlacher. No defensive player has been more dominant on the field than Shawne this year, and the numbers don't even tell the whole story. He's forced interceptions, ruined countless plays with his constant pressure, and to boot nobody runs on him.

That said, he won't get it. No dice. 4 game suspension.




Seriously watch this guy fly around it's insane. He had a flying leap from like twenty feet away to club somebody Igor had already mostly taken down.

Your a ******* homer too. JT has had a much better year then him.

JT- 11.5 sacks, 8 force fumbles, and two int's both return for a td. And keep in mind that JT has been consistantly putting pressure on the QB's and plus, he didn't cheat.

draftguru151
12-11-2006, 04:04 PM
I would just like to point out JT has twice as many FF, twice as many INTs, and nearly twice as many PDs, and he has more tackles and Merriman only has 1 more sack. Even if Merriman missed 4 games with injury he hasn't had as good of a year as Taylor and the steroids are irrelevant. Add in the roids and I see no possibilty of Merriman gettin it.

nobodyinparticular
12-11-2006, 04:05 PM
Yes. Steroid rumors didn't keep Bonds from winning seven MVP's. It isn't a man of the year award. The question is, is he worthy of the DPOY award and the answer is plainly yes. That so many people voted no is just biased and stupid. Get over yourselves.

Streriod rumors vs. actually getting caught. There is a huge difference. Shawne Merriman was actually caught using performance enhancing drugs--tainting the game. He does not now, nor does he ever deserve any award.

Shiver
12-11-2006, 04:08 PM
According to the 'once caught he never deserves an award' argument, Julius Peppers should never win it either. Ephedra is banned acrossed the board by pro sports, it's noted for being a stimulant similar to adrenaline. And looking at his body, can anyone honestly say that a 6'6" 280-lbs, 4.7, 40-inch guy is like that naturally? He no doubt is on HGH, which is something a likely shocking amount of football players are on.

San Diego Chicken
12-11-2006, 04:18 PM
Yes. Steroid rumors didn't keep Bonds from winning seven MVP's. It isn't a man of the year award. The question is, is he worthy of the DPOY award and the answer is plainly yes. That so many people voted no is just biased and stupid. Get over yourselves.

Streriod rumors vs. actually getting caught. There is a huge difference. Shawne Merriman was actually caught using performance enhancing drugs--tainting the game. He does not now, nor does he ever deserve any award.

Then let me clarify. Bonds admitted steroid usage to a grand jury. Therefore, no difference. To say that Merriman does not ever deserve an award is laughable. As long as he's allowed to play in the NFL he is deserving of any award that his performance warrants. The level of self righteousness in your post is amazing.

eazyb81
12-11-2006, 04:19 PM
According to the 'once caught he never deserves an award' argument, Julius Peppers should never win it either. Ephedra is banned acrossed the board by pro sports, it's noted for being a stimulant similar to adrenaline. And looking at his body, can anyone honestly say that a 6'6" 280-lbs, 4.7, 40-inch guy is like that naturally? He no doubt is on HGH, which is something a likely shocking amount of football players are on.

LOL, ephedra is hardly comparable to anabolic steroids.

Any player in the NFL COULD have used HGH, but this isn't a witch hunt. Merriman actually got caught with steroids, we don't have to guess with him.

He is 100%, without a doubt, a cheater.

Shiver
12-11-2006, 04:25 PM
Ephedra is a worth the same four game suspension as Nandrolone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephedra

Ephedra is both a stimulant (similar to adrenaline) and a thermogenic. It stimulates the brain, increases heart rate, constricts blood vessels (increasing blood pressure), and expands bronchial tubes (making breathing easier). Its thermogenic properties cause an increase in metabolism, evidenced by an increase in body heat.

Oft-mocked Todd Sauerbrun's suspension was because of Ephedra. If using any performance enhancer is 'cheating' then it should have a broad definition to any and every performance supplement.

sweetness34
12-11-2006, 04:39 PM
And he was suspended for what? Oh yea, steroids. I don't think so. JT gets my vote right now.

dcarey20
12-11-2006, 04:46 PM
i doubt he wins it because of the steroids, but he is arguably the most dominant defensive player in the league....

eazyb81
12-11-2006, 04:48 PM
Ephedra is a worth the same four game suspension as Nandrolone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephedra

Ephedra is both a stimulant (similar to adrenaline) and a thermogenic. It stimulates the brain, increases heart rate, constricts blood vessels (increasing blood pressure), and expands bronchial tubes (making breathing easier). Its thermogenic properties cause an increase in metabolism, evidenced by an increase in body heat.

Oft-mocked Todd Sauerbrun's suspension was because of Ephedra. If using any performance enhancer is 'cheating' then it should have a broad definition to any and every performance supplement.

Never said they didn't earn the same suspension, just that they aren't comparable when we're discussing Merriman's situation.

You can't paint this situation with a broad brush. A suspension from ephedra isn't nearly as concerning as being caught using anabolic steroids, which is a blatant attempt to circumvent the rules.

Smooth Criminal
12-11-2006, 05:01 PM
He is a great defender and is having a great year but with the suspension I don't think he'll get it. It will probably go to a guy like Ed Reed, Ray Lewis, Champ Bailey or Brian Urlacher.

nobodyinparticular
12-11-2006, 05:31 PM
Yes. Steroid rumors didn't keep Bonds from winning seven MVP's. It isn't a man of the year award. The question is, is he worthy of the DPOY award and the answer is plainly yes. That so many people voted no is just biased and stupid. Get over yourselves.

Streriod rumors vs. actually getting caught. There is a huge difference. Shawne Merriman was actually caught using performance enhancing drugs--tainting the game. He does not now, nor does he ever deserve any award.

Then let me clarify. Bonds admitted steroid usage to a grand jury. Therefore, no difference. To say that Merriman does not ever deserve an award is laughable. As long as he's allowed to play in the NFL he is deserving of any award that his performance warrants. The level of self righteousness in your post is amazing.

Well, perhaps he shouldn't be allowed to play in the NFL.

San Diego Chicken
12-11-2006, 05:42 PM
Yes. Steroid rumors didn't keep Bonds from winning seven MVP's. It isn't a man of the year award. The question is, is he worthy of the DPOY award and the answer is plainly yes. That so many people voted no is just biased and stupid. Get over yourselves.

Streriod rumors vs. actually getting caught. There is a huge difference. Shawne Merriman was actually caught using performance enhancing drugs--tainting the game. He does not now, nor does he ever deserve any award.

Then let me clarify. Bonds admitted steroid usage to a grand jury. Therefore, no difference. To say that Merriman does not ever deserve an award is laughable. As long as he's allowed to play in the NFL he is deserving of any award that his performance warrants. The level of self righteousness in your post is amazing.

Well, perhaps he shouldn't be allowed to play in the NFL.

Can we disband the Raiders while we're at it, having employed Lyle Alzado and Bill Romanowski?

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
12-11-2006, 06:02 PM
Yes. Steroid rumors didn't keep Bonds from winning seven MVP's. It isn't a man of the year award. The question is, is he worthy of the DPOY award and the answer is plainly yes. That so many people voted no is just biased and stupid. Get over yourselves.

Streriod rumors vs. actually getting caught. There is a huge difference. Shawne Merriman was actually caught using performance enhancing drugs--tainting the game. He does not now, nor does he ever deserve any award.

Then let me clarify. Bonds admitted steroid usage to a grand jury. Therefore, no difference. To say that Merriman does not ever deserve an award is laughable. As long as he's allowed to play in the NFL he is deserving of any award that his performance warrants. The level of self righteousness in your post is amazing.

Well, perhaps he shouldn't be allowed to play in the NFL.

As a Broncos fan, I concur.

nobodyinparticular
12-11-2006, 06:15 PM
Yes. Steroid rumors didn't keep Bonds from winning seven MVP's. It isn't a man of the year award. The question is, is he worthy of the DPOY award and the answer is plainly yes. That so many people voted no is just biased and stupid. Get over yourselves.

Streriod rumors vs. actually getting caught. There is a huge difference. Shawne Merriman was actually caught using performance enhancing drugs--tainting the game. He does not now, nor does he ever deserve any award.

Then let me clarify. Bonds admitted steroid usage to a grand jury. Therefore, no difference. To say that Merriman does not ever deserve an award is laughable. As long as he's allowed to play in the NFL he is deserving of any award that his performance warrants. The level of self righteousness in your post is amazing.

Well, perhaps he shouldn't be allowed to play in the NFL.

Can we disband the Raiders while we're at it, having employed Lyle Alzado and Bill Romanowski?

Did I say we were going to disband the Chargers? No. I said maybe Merriman should not be allowed to play in the NFL.

I think the punishment for using steroids, first time, should be at least 1 full year. A second offense at any point during the rest of the player's career would be a lifetime ban.

Yes, Romo used steroids. Yes, Alzado used steroids. (although I don't know if they were illegal at the point) So did Barrett Robbins and Chris Cooper. I'm glad that all of them are gone from the Raiders. I find it incredibly disgusting when people try to illegally cut corners to make themselves better. When people artificially raise the level of the playing field. It's despicable to me. Shawne Merriman knew EXACTLY what he was doing as he was taking the steroids. There is absolutely no excuse. All he receives is a 4 game suspension? PLEASE!

njx9
12-11-2006, 07:09 PM
i couldn't really care less, although i think taylor is more deserving, but his stats from yesterday shouldn't be a big exclamation point on his year as he was abusing the equivalent of a high school left tackle.

my vote would be no on him if i had a gun to my head, but then, i think san diego fans are only defending him because he's on san diego. had peyton manning been caught with steroids, i'm sure they'd be jumping all over themselves to agree that it should disqualify him from contending with LT for the award.

Shiver
12-11-2006, 07:12 PM
my vote would be no on him if i had a gun to my head, but then, i think san diego fans are only defending him because he's on san diego. had peyton manning been caught with steroids, i'm sure they'd be jumping all over themselves to agree that it should disqualify him from contending with LT for the award.

Well the big anti-Merriman fans are either rivals (NIP, easyb) or fans of the team that took Ware over him (dwaresackmachine). There is an agenda either way.

njx9
12-11-2006, 07:13 PM
my vote would be no on him if i had a gun to my head, but then, i think san diego fans are only defending him because he's on san diego. had peyton manning been caught with steroids, i'm sure they'd be jumping all over themselves to agree that it should disqualify him from contending with LT for the award.

Well the big anti-Merriman fans are either rivals (NIP, easyb) or fans of the team that took Ware over him (dwaresackmachine). There is an agenda either way.

sure, there always is here. although honestly, i haven't seen many AFC West folks calling for peyton for MVP over LT. *shrug*

marks01234
12-11-2006, 07:41 PM
I'm a Chargers fan so if anything I have a pro-merriman agenda if anything.

He plain doesn't deserve the award over Jason Taylor (and Champ Bailey IMO) at this point. That's putting the steriod issue aside and treating it like an injury.

That being said, I do think he's the best defensive player in the AFC.

draftguru151
12-11-2006, 07:42 PM
my vote would be no on him if i had a gun to my head, but then, i think san diego fans are only defending him because he's on san diego. had peyton manning been caught with steroids, i'm sure they'd be jumping all over themselves to agree that it should disqualify him from contending with LT for the award.

Well the big anti-Merriman fans are either rivals (NIP, easyb) or fans of the team that took Ware over him (dwaresackmachine). There is an agenda either way.

Where do I fall under that?

njx9
12-11-2006, 07:44 PM
my vote would be no on him if i had a gun to my head, but then, i think san diego fans are only defending him because he's on san diego. had peyton manning been caught with steroids, i'm sure they'd be jumping all over themselves to agree that it should disqualify him from contending with LT for the award.

Well the big anti-Merriman fans are either rivals (NIP, easyb) or fans of the team that took Ware over him (dwaresackmachine). There is an agenda either way.

Where do I fall under that?

you're a jason taylor homer.

draftguru151
12-11-2006, 08:40 PM
my vote would be no on him if i had a gun to my head, but then, i think san diego fans are only defending him because he's on san diego. had peyton manning been caught with steroids, i'm sure they'd be jumping all over themselves to agree that it should disqualify him from contending with LT for the award.

Well the big anti-Merriman fans are either rivals (NIP, easyb) or fans of the team that took Ware over him (dwaresackmachine). There is an agenda either way.

Where do I fall under that?

you're a jason taylor homer.

What about before the JT4MVP stuff when he was first suspended? :lol:

Shiver
12-11-2006, 08:52 PM
No, by "anti-Merriman" I mean those who consider that 'he was caught once, he will always be considered a cheater' group.

CC.SD
12-11-2006, 10:51 PM
No, by "anti-Merriman" I mean those who consider that 'he was caught once, he will always be considered a cheater' group.

Yah those people need to get laid or go outside more. BTW I think Champ's stock has dropped quite a bit with a 4 game nosedive. It's probably down to Taylor, Peppers and Urlacher.

nobodyinparticular
12-11-2006, 10:52 PM
No, by "anti-Merriman" I mean those who consider that 'he was caught once, he will always be considered a cheater' group.

Yah those people need to get laid or go outside more. BTW I think Champ's stock has dropped quite a bit with a 4 game nosedive. It's probably down to Taylor, Peppers and Urlacher.

Or you could grow a set of morals.

njx9
12-11-2006, 11:05 PM
No, by "anti-Merriman" I mean those who consider that 'he was caught once, he will always be considered a cheater' group.

Yah those people need to get laid or go outside more.

brilliant response. :roll:

Komp
12-11-2006, 11:12 PM
haha....

San Diego Chicken
12-11-2006, 11:33 PM
No, by "anti-Merriman" I mean those who consider that 'he was caught once, he will always be considered a cheater' group.

Yah those people need to get laid or go outside more. BTW I think Champ's stock has dropped quite a bit with a 4 game nosedive. It's probably down to Taylor, Peppers and Urlacher.

Or you could grow a set of morals.


Oh boy, how we should all aspire be as moralistic as all the Cheifs and Raiders fans in this thread. Creating your own version of the truth about someone you don't know is apparently very morally upstanding.

Paranoidmoonduck
12-12-2006, 12:04 AM
No, by "anti-Merriman" I mean those who consider that 'he was caught once, he will always be considered a cheater' group.

Yah those people need to get laid or go outside more. BTW I think Champ's stock has dropped quite a bit with a 4 game nosedive. It's probably down to Taylor, Peppers and Urlacher.

Or you could grow a set of morals.

Grow a set of morals? You mean crucify Merriman when it is very very likely that way more footballs players than we are willing to admit are using performance enhancers one way or the other.

You can accuse Merriman of being stupid for getting caught, but that is about it.

However, that is not what this thread is about. Jason Taylor has the better numbers and played the whole season, so he deserves it.

Shiver
12-12-2006, 12:49 AM
Grow a set of morals? You mean crucify Merriman when it is very very likely that way more footballs players than we are willing to admit are using performance enhancers one way or the other.

You can accuse Merriman of being stupid for getting caught, but that is about it.

That covers my thoughts perfectly. I would bet all the 'freak' athletes are on something. They just haven't been caught. It's the nature of pro sports and it isn't going to go away.

Xonraider
12-12-2006, 01:28 AM
I'll take steroids, maybe I get to the NFL. :roll:

niel89
12-12-2006, 04:59 AM
i say no. 4 games out just doesnt cut it and the addition of steroids makes his chances worse. plus i think that JT is having a better season.

yourfavestoner
12-12-2006, 06:06 AM
You have to admit, too, that there are some players who the the voters feel are more of a priority to receive an award than others. For example, in recent years, it's been fairly obvious who the winner of the Heisman trophy would be, and, as a result, the voters award the Maxwell Award to the player most likely to be the runner up for the Heisman. There's a priority to reward both of them.

I think that the voters are going to feel that it's likely that Merriman will win a Defensive Player of the Year award at some point in his career, probably even multiple times. Jason Taylor, meanwhile, is getting up there in age, and it's unlikely that he'll ever achieve this type of production for the rest of his career.

BlindSite
12-12-2006, 06:50 AM
Peppers
Taylor
Bailey

They're the only three who should really be considered. Pep's play has been marred by the fact that he's on the field way too much since our offense can't sustain a drive. The lack of holding calls has been absolutely ridiculous to boot.

Merriman is a steroid taking rushing weakside linebacker... He shouldn't be mentioned with the aforementioned three, he's not on their tier.

keylime_5
12-12-2006, 11:24 AM
If he can lead the league in sacks after missing 4 games then how can he not win it? He is one of the 3 best defensive players in the game along with Urlacher and Peppers (bailey and lewis being 4th and 5th) and is having the best season of all five of those guys.

Moses
12-12-2006, 11:41 AM
If he can lead the league in sacks after missing 4 games then how can he not win it? He is one of the 3 best defensive players in the game along with Urlacher and Peppers (bailey and lewis being 4th and 5th) and is having the best season of all five of those guys.

You are forgetting Jason Taylor who is having a better season. I highly doubt that the NFL will give an award to a substance-abuser in the year that he was suspended. It sends the wrong message.

nobodyinparticular
12-12-2006, 12:48 PM
Grow a set of morals? You mean crucify Merriman when it is very very likely that way more footballs players than we are willing to admit are using performance enhancers one way or the other.

You can accuse Merriman of being stupid for getting caught, but that is about it.

That covers my thoughts perfectly. I would bet all the 'freak' athletes are on something. They just haven't been caught. It's the nature of pro sports and it isn't going to go away.

So let's just roll over and condone it, is that what you're saying? Great...

Do you seriously realize what the ramafications of that will be? Younger generations in high school and college will see everyone's performances increase because of steroid use so they will have 1 of 2 choices.

1) Work hard, and get better the natural way, only to see someone with less talent but a better pharmacist get paid more. This person's natural abilities which would be elite on a level playing field are only noticed as average because he is not taking steroids. He gets neither the comparable numbers, the fame nor the money he would.

or

2) He sees everyone in professional sports taking steroids so he decides he has to level the playing field himself. At age 16 he starts using anabolic steroids not to truly give himself the edge, but to take away the edge that others have on him. He uses steroids through high school and college, gets drafted in the 1st round and has a Pro Bowl career. The longer this cycle continues, the more kids will see this and the younger the threshold will be to start using steroids. Do you have any idea the effect it would have on somone's body to start using steroids in their teenage years?

By giving Shawne Merriman the DPOY in the very same year he was caught and suspended for steroids, you are not only condoning steroid use, but you are rewarding it. Do you really want to do that?

To address your argument that "everyone else is doing it so why punish Merriman" I think it truly shows your age. I'm not proffessing to be a wise man, I'm only 19, but it's the same things that parents hear from their junior high and high school kids. "But Johnny's mom let's him do it!!!"

The fact of the matter is that Shawne Merriman was caught. Because we know he did it, it is imperetive that he be punished greatly for what he did. Anyone else who gets caught would receive the same punishment. But to not punish him merely because of suspicion (and likely true) that steroid use is rampant in the NFL is purely asinine. You have to punish the ones you catch. This is to set is precedence for others and to show that there should be no tolerance for steroids lest we have more kids who take Option #2. Should we have more Lyle Alzado's out there? People who die from brain cancer because of steroid use? Imagine the ramafications of there being hundreds if not thousands of kids taking Option #2. The negative side effects on those kids would be catastrophic. Jason Giambi also used HGH (allegedly) and he got a tumor (the was benign) when he was 33. If kids started using it while they were still in the early stages of life, just a year or two after puberty, the effects would be terrible.

Not just for the sake of the integrity of the sport now, but for the sake of future generations and keeping sports fun, it is imperetive that Shawne Merriman and any other football player, baseball player, track star or basketball player who is caught using steroids receive a hefty punishment.

eacantdraft
12-12-2006, 01:58 PM
Grow a set of morals? You mean crucify Merriman when it is very very likely that way more footballs players than we are willing to admit are using performance enhancers one way or the other.

You can accuse Merriman of being stupid for getting caught, but that is about it.

That covers my thoughts perfectly. I would bet all the 'freak' athletes are on something. They just haven't been caught. It's the nature of pro sports and it isn't going to go away.

So let's just roll over and condone it, is that what you're saying? Great...

Do you seriously realize what the ramafications of that will be? Younger generations in high school and college will see everyone's performances increase because of steroid use so they will have 1 of 2 choices.

1) Work hard, and get better the natural way, only to see someone with less talent but a better pharmacist get paid more. This person's natural abilities which would be elite on a level playing field are only noticed as average because he is not taking steroids. He gets neither the comparable numbers, the fame nor the money he would.

or

2) He sees everyone in professional sports taking steroids so he decides he has to level the playing field himself. At age 16 he starts using anabolic steroids not to truly give himself the edge, but to take away the edge that others have on him. He uses steroids through high school and college, gets drafted in the 1st round and has a Pro Bowl career. The longer this cycle continues, the more kids will see this and the younger the threshold will be to start using steroids. Do you have any idea the effect it would have on somone's body to start using steroids in their teenage years?

By giving Shawne Merriman the DPOY in the very same year he was caught and suspended for steroids, you are not only condoning steroid use, but you are rewarding it. Do you really want to do that?

To address your argument that "everyone else is doing it so why punish Merriman" I think it truly shows your age. I'm not proffessing to be a wise man, I'm only 19, but it's the same things that parents hear from their junior high and high school kids. "But Johnny's mom let's him do it!!!"

The fact of the matter is that Shawne Merriman was caught. Because we know he did it, it is imperetive that he be punished greatly for what he did. Anyone else who gets caught would receive the same punishment. But to not punish him merely because of suspicion (and likely true) that steroid use is rampant in the NFL is purely asinine. You have to punish the ones you catch. This is to set is precedence for others and to show that there should be no tolerance for steroids lest we have more kids who take Option #2. Should we have more Lyle Alzado's out there? People who die from brain cancer because of steroid use? Imagine the ramafications of there being hundreds if not thousands of kids taking Option #2. The negative side effects on those kids would be catastrophic. Jason Giambi also used HGH (allegedly) and he got a tumor (the was benign) when he was 33. If kids started using it while they were still in the early stages of life, just a year or two after puberty, the effects would be terrible.

Not just for the sake of the integrity of the sport now, but for the sake of future generations and keeping sports fun, it is imperetive that Shawne Merriman and any other football player, baseball player, track star or basketball player who is caught using steroids receive a hefty punishment.

Football, unlike baseball, doesn't have a character clause in their Hall of Fame balloting. That also carries over to voting for awards. Football writers and journalists are much more liberal than their baseball counterparts when it comes to character.

LT the First may not have gotten into the Football Hall of Fame if the baseball writers were applied. Paul Hourning probably would have never gotten into the HOF.

nobodyinparticular
12-12-2006, 02:50 PM
Football, unlike baseball, doesn't have a character clause in their Hall of Fame balloting. That also carries over to voting for awards. Football writers and journalists are much more liberal than their baseball counterparts when it comes to character.

LT the First may not have gotten into the Football Hall of Fame if the baseball writers were applied. Paul Hourning probably would have never gotten into the HOF.

But you still can't give someone an award if he cheated to "earn" it.

Shiver
12-12-2006, 02:51 PM
Don't condone it, but accept the reality of the situation. No one can accurately say who is on steroids and performance enhancers and who isn't. Say that Merriman isn't given the award, but Urlacher or Peppers are. Who is to say that those two aren't on anything? Urlacher is 6'4" 260-lbs and can run like linebackers much smaller than he is. Peppers is 6'6" 280-lbs and can move and run like a typical 3-4 rushbacker, except at 30-lbs larger. It's really easy to become paranoid and skeptical regarding pro sports.

njx9
12-12-2006, 02:55 PM
Don't condone it, but accept the reality of the situation. No one can accurately say who is on steroids and performance enhancers and who isn't. Say that Merriman isn't given the award, but Urlacher or Peppers are. Who is to say that those two aren't on anything? Urlacher is 6'4" 260-lbs and can run like linebackers much smaller than he is. Peppers is 6'6" 280-lbs and can move and run like a typical 3-4 rushbacker, except at 30-lbs larger. It's really easy to become paranoid and skeptical regarding pro sports.

does it matter? one was PROVEN, the others are ASSUMPTIONS.

i would imagine that NIP would say the same thing about peppers if he'd been caught. it's absolutely silly to say that since everyone in the NFL is on something even though 99% of them have never tested positive, it doesn't matter and shouldn't apply to someone who was caught red-handed.

that's akin to saying that, since i can assume that 99% of all people have taken something that wasn't theirs, that those convicted of grand theft auto shouldn't really be listed as felons anymore.

Shiver
12-12-2006, 02:59 PM
He was punished for it already. Does that mean that if he doesn't test positive from here on out, for the rest of his career, that he is steroid clean? Or as NIP wants, just assume he's a cheater at all times?

nobodyinparticular
12-12-2006, 03:01 PM
Don't condone it, but accept the reality of the situation. No one can accurately say who is on steroids and performance enhancers and who isn't. Say that Merriman isn't given the award, but Urlacher or Peppers are. Who is to say that those two aren't on anything? Urlacher is 6'4" 260-lbs and can run like linebackers much smaller than he is. Peppers is 6'6" 280-lbs and can move and run like a typical 3-4 rushbacker, except at 30-lbs larger. It's really easy to become paranoid and skeptical regarding pro sports.

That is not only accepting the situation, but it is accepting the use of steroids. Accepting the use of steroids results in condoning the use of steroids whether you call it that or not. It is what it is.

And to answer your question about Urlacher and Peppers, the results of the urine samples they have given say they are not on anabolic steroids. (that can be detected at least)

The fact remains that Merriman tested positive. Urlacher did not. Neither did Taylor. Neither did Bailey. As a result, you punish the ones who have tested positive first. Then, if you would like, you strengthen the testing program. Take blood samples. (which is what it takes to detect HGH) Commit money to researching better testing. And punish those who have tested positive.

If it was Urlacher or Taylor who had tested positive, I would be holding the same argument for them. I find it absolutely despicable when people think they can cut corners to artificially raise their performance level. It is not just tainting their numbers, but it ruins the game and ruins the sport on all levels.

You have to punish those who have been caught first. That's the first step and it must be done.

Shiver
12-12-2006, 03:03 PM
If they get blood testing, and stricter testing, then by all means punish those who are caught. The problem with this scenario is there are so many loopholes. The only thing Merriman proved to me is that he is stupid to not get away with it like the other guys. My question, does one test mean he is always disqualified for any kind of recognition in your mind?

njx9
12-12-2006, 03:04 PM
He was punished for it already. Does that mean that if he doesn't test positive from here on out, for the rest of his career, that he is steroid clean? Or as NIP wants, just assume he's a cheater at all times?

absolutely not, but it means he cheated this season. thus, this season, he shouldn't be rewarded for playing illegally, and moreso because none of the other guys mentioned have tested positive for steroid use this season.

8.5 of his sacks occured while he was using steroids, i don't believe there's any way that you can justify that as making him worthy of the DPOY award. next year, if he tests clean all season, sure. this year he didn't.

(keep in mind that my argument is based on the NFL rules, if i had it my way, players would be banned for life on the first positive test)

Shiver
12-12-2006, 03:08 PM
Okay, I agree with that. I think Taylor is more deserving anyway, but whatever. I just don't agree that Merriman should be branded for life as a cheater.

San Diego Chicken
12-12-2006, 03:21 PM
How ironic, Jason Taylor and the Dolphins steal protection signals. I wonder how many people think that his "cheating" invalidates his DPOY chances. :roll:

cunningham06
12-12-2006, 03:26 PM
How ironic, Jason Taylor and the Dolphins steal protection signals. I wonder how many people think that his "cheating" invalidates his DPOY chances. :roll:

I think that the fact that Sean Salisbury thinks he is cheating validates his DPOY chances. Nobody respects Salisburys opinion. :lol:

nobodyinparticular
12-12-2006, 03:29 PM
He was punished for it already. Does that mean that if he doesn't test positive from here on out, for the rest of his career, that he is steroid clean? Or as NIP wants, just assume he's a cheater at all times?

absolutely not, but it means he cheated this season. thus, this season, he shouldn't be rewarded for playing illegally, and moreso because none of the other guys mentioned have tested positive for steroid use this season.

8.5 of his sacks occured while he was using steroids, i don't believe there's any way that you can justify that as making him worthy of the DPOY award. next year, if he tests clean all season, sure. this year he didn't.

(keep in mind that my argument is based on the NFL rules, if i had it my way, players would be banned for life on the first positive test)

Ok Shiver, my view of Merriman being a cheater always and forever is a little out there. It is, mostly based on the idea that if he cheated with anabolic steroids now, then he could just as easily switch to HGH after his first positive test which won't be caught because of the loopholes as you stated. My argument for the lifetime question on him is that he was caught and known to have cheated with steroids so who is to say that he didn't just go find a trainer who hooked him up with HGH so he doesn't get caught--thus sustaining his high level of performance illegally once again, but this time with an undetectable substance.

It somewhat the same argument that someone who was convicted of grand theft auto is going to be under greater suspicion (whether it is warranted or not) than someone who has not been convicted of anything if there is the same evidence.

Certainly I would agree with Njx that he should not be up for any awards this year at all because of the positive test--the fact that many of the stats he reached this year were steroid induced. And I am certainly for blood testing and stricter, more frequent testing for performance enhancing steroids as well. I also agree with Njx that the punishment should be a lot stricter. At least a full season--if not more on the first test. By the second positive test, lifetime ban and perhaps even wipe the career stats clean.

weezer1195
12-12-2006, 03:46 PM
I dont understand Chargers fans. How can you defend a player on your team who took steroids? Personally if a player on my team got caught Id hate them for the rest of my life. And I would because they let me down. Merriman let every fan of the chargers and the NFL down by taking steroids. He soiled his reputation and gained negative attention for his team. He thought of himself not what his actions effects would be on his teammates, the kids who looked up to him, and the reputation of the league's players. He looked in the face of every fan and lied to them when he said he was clean and a product of hardwork and nature. Thats why he doesnt deserve it. And that is why he should be held accountable for his actions and not have excuses made for him by "fans" of the chrgers who should hold him to higher standards than the rest of the league.

San Diego Chicken
12-12-2006, 04:08 PM
I dont understand Chargers fans. How can you defend a player on your team who took steroids? Personally if a player on my team got caught Id hate them for the rest of my life. And I would because they let me down. Merriman let every fan of the chargers and the NFL down by taking steroids. He soiled his reputation and gained negative attention for his team. He thought of himself not what his actions effects would be on his teammates, the kids who looked up to him, and the reputation of the league's players. He looked in the face of every fan and lied to them when he said he was clean and a product of hardwork and nature. Thats why he doesnt deserve it. And that is why he should be held accountable for his actions and not have excuses made for him by "fans" of the chrgers who should hold him to higher standards than the rest of the league.

Merriman hasn't let me down at all. Steroids is the biggest boogeyman in pro sports today and the media has taken it and run with it, and brainwashed a lot of impressionable people as well. I suggest you spend some serious time in a gym sometime and figure out that steroids are a part of life. Merriman apologized to all of his fans and was determined to come back better than ever, and he has. People want him banned for life? What happened to giving someone a second chance? The NFL has a policy, and as long as he abides by that policy from now on he shouldn't be subject to any more jealous scrutiny.

This is sports and entertainment. It's funny and disturbing at the same time that who I assume to be grown men act like girls over an issue like steroids. Steroids have been around for years folks, and they're here to stay.

The Great Jonathan Vilma
12-12-2006, 06:10 PM
yes he's worthy based on his play. the guy is unstoppable and changes the outcome of games. he makes big plays every game, and what he's done in less games is unbelieveable.

will he get it....no, because the league can't justify giving it to someone who got caught for what he did. it would lead to more problems down the line and nothing would be learned. the guy is a freak of nature and deserves the award if not for the suspension.

worthy, yes and no. can he get it...NO

dRaFtDoRk
12-12-2006, 06:13 PM
I voted yes, but I don't think he'll get it. Merriman is tied for league lead in sacks while still missing four games. He's also forced four fumbles. I don't think he will get it because of the steriod suspension, but he is very well deserving of it.


I think it will end up being Jason Taylor. He's right up there with Julius Peppers, who is another nominee, as the most versatile defender in the NFL.

njx9
12-12-2006, 06:48 PM
I dont understand Chargers fans. How can you defend a player on your team who took steroids? Personally if a player on my team got caught Id hate them for the rest of my life. And I would because they let me down. Merriman let every fan of the chargers and the NFL down by taking steroids. He soiled his reputation and gained negative attention for his team. He thought of himself not what his actions effects would be on his teammates, the kids who looked up to him, and the reputation of the league's players. He looked in the face of every fan and lied to them when he said he was clean and a product of hardwork and nature. Thats why he doesnt deserve it. And that is why he should be held accountable for his actions and not have excuses made for him by "fans" of the chrgers who should hold him to higher standards than the rest of the league.

Merriman hasn't let me down at all. Steroids is the biggest boogeyman in pro sports today and the media has taken it and run with it, and brainwashed a lot of impressionable people as well. I suggest you spend some serious time in a gym sometime and figure out that steroids are a part of life.

*snip*

This is sports and entertainment. It's funny and disturbing at the same time that who I assume to be grown men act like girls over an issue like steroids. Steroids have been around for years folks, and they're here to stay.

that's absolutely pathetic. steroids were NEVER a part of my high school's weight program. they were NEVER a part of the weight program of the college i played at.

by this disgusting reasoning, all sports should just legalize them, and, should actually push their athletes to take them. because, they're such a part of sports.

this is just homerism. that's the only honest explanation for the lengths you're going to.

Windy
12-12-2006, 06:53 PM
How ironic, Jason Taylor and the Dolphins steal protection signals. I wonder how many people think that his "cheating" invalidates his DPOY chances. :roll:

link it.

There is no way you can compare using steroids and stealing signals. No way

njx9
12-12-2006, 06:55 PM
How ironic, Jason Taylor and the Dolphins steal protection signals. I wonder how many people think that his "cheating" invalidates his DPOY chances. :roll:

link it.

There is no way you can compare using steroids and stealing signals. No way

yeah, found the thread below. i'm curious, if you were going to make that comparison, where, in the rules, stealing signs is illegal. i can find the passage that makes certain substances illegal if the charger fans are going to try to argue next that it's somehow the same thing.

jkpigskin
12-12-2006, 07:57 PM
How ironic, Jason Taylor and the Dolphins steal protection signals. I wonder how many people think that his "cheating" invalidates his DPOY chances. :roll:

link it.

There is no way you can compare using steroids and stealing signals. No way

yeah, found the thread below. i'm curious, if you were going to make that comparison, where, in the rules, stealing signs is illegal. i can find the passage that makes certain substances illegal if the charger fans are going to try to argue next that it's somehow the same thing.

its so stupid how people think that little voice thing makes a team a cheater..... seriosly, if you whine that you lost because of some voice recording then you've got issues.....

Bearsfan123
12-12-2006, 07:58 PM
no Merrimen does not deserve it. Hes tested positive for steroids. We should all think about that for a second. He took a drug that upped his physical state of being. He took a drug that gave him an advantage over his opponents. Does he Merrimen have great talent? Yes. But how much of his physical play is all natural? How much is his ability gym work or is it chemical?

My question to the fans is how can we give a guy an award with these questions lingering about him?


If Urlacher took steroids I would immediately discount anything hes done. Anybody who takes them doesnt deserve an award. Does a cheater who stole someones answers deserve the A he gets? Definately not. Im sure most ppl will retaliate to this by saying "well im sure you've cheated." Yes I have. But i am not getting payed to play a game. I am not a guy that can devote all my time to practicing, and weight lifting to become stronger.

well thats the end of my rant. I think it was a damn good rant if I do say so myself. :lol:

San Diego Chicken
12-12-2006, 08:08 PM
I dont understand Chargers fans. How can you defend a player on your team who took steroids? Personally if a player on my team got caught Id hate them for the rest of my life. And I would because they let me down. Merriman let every fan of the chargers and the NFL down by taking steroids. He soiled his reputation and gained negative attention for his team. He thought of himself not what his actions effects would be on his teammates, the kids who looked up to him, and the reputation of the league's players. He looked in the face of every fan and lied to them when he said he was clean and a product of hardwork and nature. Thats why he doesnt deserve it. And that is why he should be held accountable for his actions and not have excuses made for him by "fans" of the chrgers who should hold him to higher standards than the rest of the league.

Merriman hasn't let me down at all. Steroids is the biggest boogeyman in pro sports today and the media has taken it and run with it, and brainwashed a lot of impressionable people as well. I suggest you spend some serious time in a gym sometime and figure out that steroids are a part of life.

*snip*

This is sports and entertainment. It's funny and disturbing at the same time that who I assume to be grown men act like girls over an issue like steroids. Steroids have been around for years folks, and they're here to stay.

that's absolutely pathetic. steroids were NEVER a part of my high school's weight program. they were NEVER a part of the weight program of the college i played at.

by this disgusting reasoning, all sports should just legalize them, and, should actually push their athletes to take them. because, they're such a part of sports.

this is just homerism. that's the only honest explanation for the lengths you're going to.

Whether steroid use is ethical or not in pro sports is up for debate. I'm not condoning it neccessarily, only trying to raise the awareness of this issue. Please try to follow along.

The NFL has a policy in place. If Merriman wishes to be an NFL player, he has to abide by that policy. He says he made a mistake. He knows he can't be a steroid user and be in the NFL.

The poster I responded to seemed to be calling out Chargers fans for supporting their player, asking why we're not ashamed of him. Why should we be? He apologized for it. If this was cocaine and not steroids, people wouldn't be going to the lengths that THEY'RE going to (calling for him to be banned, saying every fan of the NFL should be ashamed of him).

I think the whole steroid issue in team sports is highly overblown (this is an aside from the Merriman issue, ive thought this for years about Baseball as well). Maybe they should be outlawed, but to slander and shame players with a positive test here or there is wrong. Steroids don't have the dramatic effect people assume they have and aren't nearly as harmful as the media makes them out to be. In fact I believe pro sports should encourage the use of safe steroids that help with recovery times and reduce the risk of serious injury to players.

bearsfan_51
12-12-2006, 08:10 PM
That's because in sports it's better to be a coke-head than a cheater. The entire balance of sports is based on fairness, whether or not that is a myth is clearly up for debate, but that's why steroids produces a more virulent reaction than drug use. It has very little to do with the social effects.

And the reaction to steroids in football is NOTHING compared to baseball. Mostly because football isn't nearly as statistically driven.

San Diego Chicken
12-12-2006, 08:20 PM
That's because in sports it's better to be a coke-head than a cheater. The entire balance of sports is based on fairness, whether or not that is a myth is clearly up for debate, but that's why steroids produces a more virulent reaction than drug use. It has very little to do with the social effects.

And the reaction to steroids in football is NOTHING compared to baseball. Mostly because football isn't nearly as statistically driven.

Well, it is a myth. It isn't fair that the New York Yankees have an unlimited amount of resources to get the best players while the Padres are limited. It isn't fair that Denver has high altitude and road teams are at a major disadvantage. It isn't fair that Shaq is fouled much harder and more frequently than a guard in basketball.

If people want to believe Merriman is a cheater, that's fine because it's ultimately not important. As long as he doesn't get in trouble again he'll be in the NFL and continue to perform well. Kansas City, Denver and Oakland fans really can't lecture San Diego on fairness anyway. Those teams have had every issue from steroids, cheap shots, "holy roller" plays, low blocking techniques and everything in between.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
12-12-2006, 08:24 PM
That's because in sports it's better to be a coke-head than a cheater. The entire balance of sports is based on fairness, whether or not that is a myth is clearly up for debate, but that's why steroids produces a more virulent reaction than drug use. It has very little to do with the social effects.

And the reaction to steroids in football is NOTHING compared to baseball. Mostly because football isn't nearly as statistically driven.

Well, it is a myth. It isn't fair that the New York Yankees have an unlimited amount of resources to get the best players while the Padres are limited. It isn't fair that Denver has high altitude and road teams are at a major disadvantage. It isn't fair that Shaq is fouled much harder and more frequently than a guard in basketball.

If people want to believe Merriman is a cheater, that's fine because it's ultimately not important. As long as he doesn't get in trouble again he'll be in the NFL and continue to perform well. Kansas City, Denver and Oakland fans really can't lecture San Diego on fairness anyway. Those teams have had every issue from steroids, cheap shots, "holy roller" plays, low blocking techniques and everything in between.

:roll:

Stop whining.

San Diego Chicken
12-12-2006, 08:29 PM
That's because in sports it's better to be a coke-head than a cheater. The entire balance of sports is based on fairness, whether or not that is a myth is clearly up for debate, but that's why steroids produces a more virulent reaction than drug use. It has very little to do with the social effects.

And the reaction to steroids in football is NOTHING compared to baseball. Mostly because football isn't nearly as statistically driven.

Well, it is a myth. It isn't fair that the New York Yankees have an unlimited amount of resources to get the best players while the Padres are limited. It isn't fair that Denver has high altitude and road teams are at a major disadvantage. It isn't fair that Shaq is fouled much harder and more frequently than a guard in basketball.

If people want to believe Merriman is a cheater, that's fine because it's ultimately not important. As long as he doesn't get in trouble again he'll be in the NFL and continue to perform well. Kansas City, Denver and Oakland fans really can't lecture San Diego on fairness anyway. Those teams have had every issue from steroids, cheap shots, "holy roller" plays, low blocking techniques and everything in between.

:roll:

Stop whining.

Nobody's whining. The Broncos' cowardly blocking style is what it is. Just don't lecture anyone else on fairness and ethics.

Xonraider
12-12-2006, 08:30 PM
That's because in sports it's better to be a coke-head than a cheater. The entire balance of sports is based on fairness, whether or not that is a myth is clearly up for debate, but that's why steroids produces a more virulent reaction than drug use. It has very little to do with the social effects.

And the reaction to steroids in football is NOTHING compared to baseball. Mostly because football isn't nearly as statistically driven.

Well, it is a myth. It isn't fair that the New York Yankees have an unlimited amount of resources to get the best players while the Padres are limited. It isn't fair that Denver has high altitude and road teams are at a major disadvantage. It isn't fair that Shaq is fouled much harder and more frequently than a guard in basketball.

If people want to believe Merriman is a cheater, that's fine because it's ultimately not important. As long as he doesn't get in trouble again he'll be in the NFL and continue to perform well. Kansas City, Denver and Oakland fans really can't lecture San Diego on fairness anyway. Those teams have had every issue from steroids, cheap shots, "holy roller" plays, low blocking techniques and everything in between.

I beg you, tell me how the holy roller was illegal, there was no such rule that prohibited what happened.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
12-12-2006, 08:32 PM
That's because in sports it's better to be a coke-head than a cheater. The entire balance of sports is based on fairness, whether or not that is a myth is clearly up for debate, but that's why steroids produces a more virulent reaction than drug use. It has very little to do with the social effects.

And the reaction to steroids in football is NOTHING compared to baseball. Mostly because football isn't nearly as statistically driven.

Well, it is a myth. It isn't fair that the New York Yankees have an unlimited amount of resources to get the best players while the Padres are limited. It isn't fair that Denver has high altitude and road teams are at a major disadvantage. It isn't fair that Shaq is fouled much harder and more frequently than a guard in basketball.

If people want to believe Merriman is a cheater, that's fine because it's ultimately not important. As long as he doesn't get in trouble again he'll be in the NFL and continue to perform well. Kansas City, Denver and Oakland fans really can't lecture San Diego on fairness anyway. Those teams have had every issue from steroids, cheap shots, "holy roller" plays, low blocking techniques and everything in between.

:roll:

Stop whining.

Nobody's whining. The Broncos' cowardly blocking style is what it is. Just don't lecture anyone else on fairness and ethics.

So you mean cheating, and putting harmful things in your body that not only send the wrong message to kids, but gives a player an unfair advantage, is equal to a perfectly legal and strategically benificial maneuver. Okay there, Einstein.

San Diego Chicken
12-12-2006, 08:37 PM
That's because in sports it's better to be a coke-head than a cheater. The entire balance of sports is based on fairness, whether or not that is a myth is clearly up for debate, but that's why steroids produces a more virulent reaction than drug use. It has very little to do with the social effects.

And the reaction to steroids in football is NOTHING compared to baseball. Mostly because football isn't nearly as statistically driven.

Well, it is a myth. It isn't fair that the New York Yankees have an unlimited amount of resources to get the best players while the Padres are limited. It isn't fair that Denver has high altitude and road teams are at a major disadvantage. It isn't fair that Shaq is fouled much harder and more frequently than a guard in basketball.

If people want to believe Merriman is a cheater, that's fine because it's ultimately not important. As long as he doesn't get in trouble again he'll be in the NFL and continue to perform well. Kansas City, Denver and Oakland fans really can't lecture San Diego on fairness anyway. Those teams have had every issue from steroids, cheap shots, "holy roller" plays, low blocking techniques and everything in between.

:roll:

Stop whining.

Nobody's whining. The Broncos' cowardly blocking style is what it is. Just don't lecture anyone else on fairness and ethics.

So you mean cheating, and putting harmful things in your body that not only send the wrong message to kids, but gives a player an unfair advantage, is equal to a perfectly legal and strategically benificial maneuver. Okay there, Einstein.

Didn't the Broncos win two championships with admitted "cheater" Bill Romanowski? Are you ashamed of your two championships? Are you all for giving them back?

njx9
12-12-2006, 08:38 PM
was denver's altitude actually compared to steroids in an unfairness debate? at least it's now clear that this thread has turned into a joke.

that is, assuming that saying steroids are "far safer" than the MEDIA makes us believe hadn't done that already.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
12-12-2006, 08:40 PM
That's because in sports it's better to be a coke-head than a cheater. The entire balance of sports is based on fairness, whether or not that is a myth is clearly up for debate, but that's why steroids produces a more virulent reaction than drug use. It has very little to do with the social effects.

And the reaction to steroids in football is NOTHING compared to baseball. Mostly because football isn't nearly as statistically driven.

Well, it is a myth. It isn't fair that the New York Yankees have an unlimited amount of resources to get the best players while the Padres are limited. It isn't fair that Denver has high altitude and road teams are at a major disadvantage. It isn't fair that Shaq is fouled much harder and more frequently than a guard in basketball.

If people want to believe Merriman is a cheater, that's fine because it's ultimately not important. As long as he doesn't get in trouble again he'll be in the NFL and continue to perform well. Kansas City, Denver and Oakland fans really can't lecture San Diego on fairness anyway. Those teams have had every issue from steroids, cheap shots, "holy roller" plays, low blocking techniques and everything in between.

:roll:

Stop whining.

Nobody's whining. The Broncos' cowardly blocking style is what it is. Just don't lecture anyone else on fairness and ethics.

So you mean cheating, and putting harmful things in your body that not only send the wrong message to kids, but gives a player an unfair advantage, is equal to a perfectly legal and strategically benificial maneuver. Okay there, Einstein.

Didn't the Broncos win two championships with admitted "cheater" Bill Romanowski? Are you ashamed of your two championships? Are you all for giving them back?

Okay so we go from you trying to say cut blocking is dirty to talking about one player on the Broncos championship defense.

NEW YORK -- Bill Romanowski used steroids and human growth hormone supplied by Victor Conte, the former NFL linebacker tells CBS' "60 Minutes" in an interview to be broadcast Sunday.


Romanowski


Romanowski said he took illegal steroids for a two-year period starting in 2001 and got them from Conte, the former head of the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative, which has been at the center of a steroids controversy in several sports.

OH! WAIT A MINUTE!! He was clean when he won those super bowls. Awwww, gee.

San Diego Chicken
12-12-2006, 08:41 PM
was denver's altitude actually compared to steroids in an unfairness debate? at least it's now clear that this thread has turned into a joke.

that is, assuming that saying steroids are "far safer" than the MEDIA makes us believe hadn't done that already.

Care to dispute either of those two statements?

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
12-12-2006, 08:42 PM
was denver's altitude actually compared to steroids in an unfairness debate? at least it's now clear that this thread has turned into a joke.

that is, assuming that saying steroids are "far safer" than the MEDIA makes us believe hadn't done that already.

Care to dispute either of those two statements?

I guess San Diego's heatand beautiful weather are cheating. I guess Lambeau field's coldness is cheating then.

San Diego Chicken
12-12-2006, 08:44 PM
That's because in sports it's better to be a coke-head than a cheater. The entire balance of sports is based on fairness, whether or not that is a myth is clearly up for debate, but that's why steroids produces a more virulent reaction than drug use. It has very little to do with the social effects.

And the reaction to steroids in football is NOTHING compared to baseball. Mostly because football isn't nearly as statistically driven.

Well, it is a myth. It isn't fair that the New York Yankees have an unlimited amount of resources to get the best players while the Padres are limited. It isn't fair that Denver has high altitude and road teams are at a major disadvantage. It isn't fair that Shaq is fouled much harder and more frequently than a guard in basketball.

If people want to believe Merriman is a cheater, that's fine because it's ultimately not important. As long as he doesn't get in trouble again he'll be in the NFL and continue to perform well. Kansas City, Denver and Oakland fans really can't lecture San Diego on fairness anyway. Those teams have had every issue from steroids, cheap shots, "holy roller" plays, low blocking techniques and everything in between.

:roll:

Stop whining.

Nobody's whining. The Broncos' cowardly blocking style is what it is. Just don't lecture anyone else on fairness and ethics.

So you mean cheating, and putting harmful things in your body that not only send the wrong message to kids, but gives a player an unfair advantage, is equal to a perfectly legal and strategically benificial maneuver. Okay there, Einstein.

Didn't the Broncos win two championships with admitted "cheater" Bill Romanowski? Are you ashamed of your two championships? Are you all for giving them back?

Okay so we go from you trying to say cut blocking is dirty to talking about one player on the Broncos championship defense.

NEW YORK -- Bill Romanowski used steroids and human growth hormone supplied by Victor Conte, the former NFL linebacker tells CBS' "60 Minutes" in an interview to be broadcast Sunday.


Romanowski


Romanowski said he took illegal steroids for a two-year period starting in 2001 and got them from Conte, the former head of the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative, which has been at the center of a steroids controversy in several sports.

OH! WAIT A MINUTE!! He was clean when he won those super bowls. Awwww, gee.

So he was clean because he says he was clean? Why is Romanowski credible while Merriman isn't?

San Diego Chicken
12-12-2006, 08:48 PM
was denver's altitude actually compared to steroids in an unfairness debate? at least it's now clear that this thread has turned into a joke.

that is, assuming that saying steroids are "far safer" than the MEDIA makes us believe hadn't done that already.

Care to dispute either of those two statements?

I guess San Diego's heatand beautiful weather are cheating. I guess Lambeau field's coldness is cheating then.

It's well known that training at altitude improves endurance (see: Kenyan distance runners) and that road teams have historically struggled with the high altitude at Mile High. I'm not complaining. It is what it is. It's just one of those built in fairness issues that we're discussing.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
12-12-2006, 08:48 PM
That's because in sports it's better to be a coke-head than a cheater. The entire balance of sports is based on fairness, whether or not that is a myth is clearly up for debate, but that's why steroids produces a more virulent reaction than drug use. It has very little to do with the social effects.

And the reaction to steroids in football is NOTHING compared to baseball. Mostly because football isn't nearly as statistically driven.

Well, it is a myth. It isn't fair that the New York Yankees have an unlimited amount of resources to get the best players while the Padres are limited. It isn't fair that Denver has high altitude and road teams are at a major disadvantage. It isn't fair that Shaq is fouled much harder and more frequently than a guard in basketball.

If people want to believe Merriman is a cheater, that's fine because it's ultimately not important. As long as he doesn't get in trouble again he'll be in the NFL and continue to perform well. Kansas City, Denver and Oakland fans really can't lecture San Diego on fairness anyway. Those teams have had every issue from steroids, cheap shots, "holy roller" plays, low blocking techniques and everything in between.

:roll:

Stop whining.

Nobody's whining. The Broncos' cowardly blocking style is what it is. Just don't lecture anyone else on fairness and ethics.

So you mean cheating, and putting harmful things in your body that not only send the wrong message to kids, but gives a player an unfair advantage, is equal to a perfectly legal and strategically benificial maneuver. Okay there, Einstein.

Didn't the Broncos win two championships with admitted "cheater" Bill Romanowski? Are you ashamed of your two championships? Are you all for giving them back?

Okay so we go from you trying to say cut blocking is dirty to talking about one player on the Broncos championship defense.

NEW YORK -- Bill Romanowski used steroids and human growth hormone supplied by Victor Conte, the former NFL linebacker tells CBS' "60 Minutes" in an interview to be broadcast Sunday.


Romanowski


Romanowski said he took illegal steroids for a two-year period starting in 2001 and got them from Conte, the former head of the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative, which has been at the center of a steroids controversy in several sports.

OH! WAIT A MINUTE!! He was clean when he won those super bowls. Awwww, gee.

So he was clean because he says he was clean? Why is Romanowski credible while Merriman isn't?

Okay. Read closely now. Romanowski already admitted to using roids for two years. Why would he lie about using them before? What would he have to gain? Also, in case you didn't know, Romanowski didn't test positive for steroids during the time period in question. Merriman did. You are speculating Romo used roids in 97-98, but he most likely did not, seeing as he admitted to using them later in his career, and if he was gonna get wet why only stick his toes in? Merriman, we know he used them, there's no denying it.

swagger
12-12-2006, 08:51 PM
He's certainly "worthy" of the award. I think the word that should be used is "eligible". Is Merriman "eligible" for DPOY.

San Diego Chicken
12-12-2006, 08:57 PM
Okay. Read closely now. Romanowski already admitted to using roids for two years. Why would he lie about using them before? What would he have to gain? Also, in case you didn't know, Romanowski didn't test positive for steroids during the time period in question. Merriman did. You are speculating Romo used roids in 97-98, but he most likely did not, seeing as he admitted to using them later in his career, and if he was gonna get wet why only stick his toes in? Merriman, we know he used them, there's no denying it.

I'm not speculating anything at all. You believe Romanowski's story as easily as Chargers fans believe Merriman. Neither story is more credible than the other one. Romanowski could have easily wanted to protect the legacy of his most productive seasons.

njx9
12-12-2006, 09:03 PM
was denver's altitude actually compared to steroids in an unfairness debate? at least it's now clear that this thread has turned into a joke.

that is, assuming that saying steroids are "far safer" than the MEDIA makes us believe hadn't done that already.

Care to dispute either of those two statements?

what's unfair about altitude? that we get better endurance? then do like the kenyans and train at bloody altitude. you've got mountains in california. actually, your highest peak is HIGHER than colorado's.

and yes, i can hear the rebuttal "well then take steroids!!!!!1" it's funny that you would think to respond with that. altitude is not and has never been illegal. steroids, oddly, are illegal in just about every major sport i can think of. they're even illegal in real life! weird!

steroids are seriously damaging to the liver, so much so that when prescribed by doctors, constant blood tests must be given to verify that no damage is being done. high dosages can make one more prone to blood clots, leukemia, and abnormal bleeding (if polycythemia develops). even further, symptoms of thrombophlebitis can develop, putting one at even higher risk of developing a blood clot that could lead to stroke or death. this is all from FDA fact sheets on various prescription anabolic steroids.

edit: just wanted to provde a link to one of those sheets: http://www.fda.gov/medwatch/SAFETY/2003/03APR_PI/Oxandrin_PI.pdf

weezer1195
12-12-2006, 09:15 PM
so in your opinion if merriman is still taking illegal substances and not getting caught then that is alright with you?

You are so disillusional its laughable. You take homerism to a new level rationalizing to yourself why steroids are okay. The question is whether he is "worthy" not whether he is eligible. If there is nothign in the rules saying he can't win it then yea he can and still might win it. But the question goes deeper to whether he is "worthy". As a sportsfan I say no. In my eyes he is not even worthy to step on the same field as a third string DE who has never seen the field but has worked his butt off to make a living and is clean.

Do you not agree that Merriman is a coward? that he is a cheater? that he is a dishonest person and bad rolemodel? What responsibility has he taken for his actions?

Keep rationalizing to urself. I know what the rulebook says and I know the policy. That isnt what we we are talking about. As far as the leauge is concerned if he doesnt fail again then good no more probs with him. But as far as I am concerned his career up to now is soiled.

San Diego Chicken
12-12-2006, 09:25 PM
was denver's altitude actually compared to steroids in an unfairness debate? at least it's now clear that this thread has turned into a joke.

that is, assuming that saying steroids are "far safer" than the MEDIA makes us believe hadn't done that already.

Care to dispute either of those two statements?

what's unfair about altitude? that we get better endurance? then do like the kenyans and train at bloody altitude. you've got mountains in california. actually, your highest peak is HIGHER than colorado's.

and yes, i can hear the rebuttal "well then take steroids!!!!!1" it's funny that you would think to respond with that. altitude is not and has never been illegal. steroids, oddly, are illegal in just about every major sport i can think of. they're even illegal in real life! weird!

steroids are seriously damaging to the liver, so much so that when prescribed by doctors, constant blood tests must be given to verify that no damage is being done. high dosages can make one more prone to blood clots, leukemia, and abnormal bleeding (if polycythemia develops). even further, symptoms of thrombophlebitis can develop, putting one at even higher risk of developing a blood clot that could lead to stroke or death. this is all from FDA fact sheets on various prescription anabolic steroids.

edit: just wanted to provde a link to one of those sheets: http://www.fda.gov/medwatch/SAFETY/2003/03APR_PI/Oxandrin_PI.pdf

From my understanding and having talked to various people throughout my life in the weight training community, steroid side effects are dosage dependent like you referenced in the article. If you noticed, the exerpt you quoted contains buzz words like "more prone" and "higher risk" and in reality the risk of serious health problems from prolonged controlled steroid use is minimal.

Real Sports had a recent segment that debunked steroid myths recently -

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2754168929523377644&q=real+sports+steroids

Again, this is simply my view of steroids from my personal experiences, I'm not saying Merriman should be allowed to use steroids while he's an NFL player. I've talked to people who are users and they aren't bad people for wanting to get the optimal performance out of their bodies. I know for a fact there are Chargers fans who disagree with me here.

njx9
12-12-2006, 09:27 PM
certain steroid users claim they're fine? are you kidding? certain cigarette smokers have told me that they're not unhealthy. so everyone should light up, right? please.

and it's a bloody medical article used for doctors who are prescribing the steroid for users, it's not a media clip that i quoted. for christ's sake. the rationalization is amazing.

San Diego Chicken
12-12-2006, 09:39 PM
certain steroid users claim they're fine? are you kidding? certain cigarette smokers have told me that they're not unhealthy. so everyone should light up, right? please.

and it's a bloody medical article used for doctors who are prescribing the steroid for users, it's not a media clip that i quoted. for christ's sake. the rationalization is amazing.

Except you have study after study that have definitively linked cigarette smoking to all sorts of health problems, and few such studies have done the same for steroids.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anabolic_steroid#Popular_misconceptions

"Another common misconception purveyed in popular culture and the media include the myth that anabolic steroids are highly dangerous and users' mortality rates are high. Anabolic steroids are used widely in the medical field without any serious health risks to users[32][33][34], and no scientific evidence has shown any long-term serious health defects from correct use of anabolic steroids. While risk of death is present in many drugs, the risk of premature death from use of anabolic steroids seems to be extremely low.[35] It is possible this myth gained popularity from claims that Lyle Alzado died from brain cancer caused by anabolic steroids. Alzado himself had claimed that his cancer was caused by anabolic steroids. However, there is no medical evidence anabolic steroids can cause brain cancer and Alzado's own doctors admitted anabolic steroids had nothing to do with his death.[36]"

Bearsfan123
12-12-2006, 10:11 PM
certain steroid users claim they're fine? are you kidding? certain cigarette smokers have told me that they're not unhealthy. so everyone should light up, right? please.

and it's a bloody medical article used for doctors who are prescribing the steroid for users, it's not a media clip that i quoted. for christ's sake. the rationalization is amazing.

njx for once i completely and utterly agree with you.


As to the question of is Merrimen "worthy" Inflected Form(s): wor·thi·er; -est
1 a : having worth or value : ESTIMABLE <a worthy cause> b : HONORABLE, MERITORIOUS <worthy candidates>
2 : having sufficient worth or importance <worthy to be remembered>
- wor·thi·ly /'w&r-[th]&-lE/ adverb


so no Merriman isnt "worthy" either. He is not honorable or meritous.

nobodyinparticular
12-12-2006, 10:15 PM
certain steroid users claim they're fine? are you kidding? certain cigarette smokers have told me that they're not unhealthy. so everyone should light up, right? please.

and it's a bloody medical article used for doctors who are prescribing the steroid for users, it's not a media clip that i quoted. for christ's sake. the rationalization is amazing.

Except you have study after study that have definitively linked cigarette smoking to all sorts of health problems, and few such studies have done the same for steroids.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anabolic_steroid#Popular_misconceptions

"Another common misconception purveyed in popular culture and the media include the myth that anabolic steroids are highly dangerous and users' mortality rates are high. Anabolic steroids are used widely in the medical field without any serious health risks to users[32][33][34], and no scientific evidence has shown any long-term serious health defects from correct use of anabolic steroids. While risk of death is present in many drugs, the risk of premature death from use of anabolic steroids seems to be extremely low.[35] It is possible this myth gained popularity from claims that Lyle Alzado died from brain cancer caused by anabolic steroids. Alzado himself had claimed that his cancer was caused by anabolic steroids. However, there is no medical evidence anabolic steroids can cause brain cancer and Alzado's own doctors admitted anabolic steroids had nothing to do with his death.[36]"

Nice. You cite an "encyclopedia" that is written by internet users. Way to back up your argment.

San Diego Chicken
12-12-2006, 10:47 PM
certain steroid users claim they're fine? are you kidding? certain cigarette smokers have told me that they're not unhealthy. so everyone should light up, right? please.

and it's a bloody medical article used for doctors who are prescribing the steroid for users, it's not a media clip that i quoted. for christ's sake. the rationalization is amazing.

Except you have study after study that have definitively linked cigarette smoking to all sorts of health problems, and few such studies have done the same for steroids.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anabolic_steroid#Popular_misconceptions

"Another common misconception purveyed in popular culture and the media include the myth that anabolic steroids are highly dangerous and users' mortality rates are high. Anabolic steroids are used widely in the medical field without any serious health risks to users[32][33][34], and no scientific evidence has shown any long-term serious health defects from correct use of anabolic steroids. While risk of death is present in many drugs, the risk of premature death from use of anabolic steroids seems to be extremely low.[35] It is possible this myth gained popularity from claims that Lyle Alzado died from brain cancer caused by anabolic steroids. Alzado himself had claimed that his cancer was caused by anabolic steroids. However, there is no medical evidence anabolic steroids can cause brain cancer and Alzado's own doctors admitted anabolic steroids had nothing to do with his death.[36]"

Nice. You cite an "encyclopedia" that is written by internet users. Way to back up your argment.

One that is properly referenced 57 times :roll:

Don't let that stop you though.

King Rhabuf
12-12-2006, 11:18 PM
I pretty sure Peppers won DROY with a supplement suspension (wasn't his fault). I would vote for Merriman for DPOY.

rchrd
12-13-2006, 12:52 AM
This thread is like walking into a dark room, banging your head against a wall turning around and repeating for 5 pages.

njx9
12-13-2006, 01:38 PM
certain steroid users claim they're fine? are you kidding? certain cigarette smokers have told me that they're not unhealthy. so everyone should light up, right? please.

and it's a bloody medical article used for doctors who are prescribing the steroid for users, it's not a media clip that i quoted. for christ's sake. the rationalization is amazing.

Except you have study after study that have definitively linked cigarette smoking to all sorts of health problems, and few such studies have done the same for steroids.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anabolic_steroid#Popular_misconceptions

"Another common misconception purveyed in popular culture and the media include the myth that anabolic steroids are highly dangerous and users' mortality rates are high. Anabolic steroids are used widely in the medical field without any serious health risks to users[32][33][34], and no scientific evidence has shown any long-term serious health defects from correct use of anabolic steroids. While risk of death is present in many drugs, the risk of premature death from use of anabolic steroids seems to be extremely low.[35] It is possible this myth gained popularity from claims that Lyle Alzado died from brain cancer caused by anabolic steroids. Alzado himself had claimed that his cancer was caused by anabolic steroids. However, there is no medical evidence anabolic steroids can cause brain cancer and Alzado's own doctors admitted anabolic steroids had nothing to do with his death.[36]"

ah, good, yes, i'll take a wikipedia article over a fact sheet given to doctors who are actually prescribing the drug. fantastic.

and yes, some GREAT sources. one is basically an interview with arnold schwarzenegger on a german or austrian website of unverifiable veracity. one of the sources was proof that suicide is a leading killer of young adults. great. one of the actual studies was done on men within 6 years of the age of 72 ("METHODS: Thirty-two men 72 +/- 6 years of age were randomized to receive oxandrolone " - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=16424293&query_hl=8&itool=pubmed_docsum). that'll sure back up their use in young adults and athletes. another (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=16540931&query_hl=8&itool=pubmed_docsum) studied their efficacy in treating HIV+ individuals. the third article in that series (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11701431&dopt=Abstract) actually makes no statement regarding safety of use, and instead concludes that different dosages have different effects (i.e. take less get less, take more get more).

the next quoted article actually followed young adult males who were taking anabolic steroids on their own. oddly, in concludes that there were a "wide array of mood disorders and substance abuse." sure sounds like a resounding recommendation of safety. the study was also over the course of a single year. hardly proof of "safety". there are then 5 links on "roid rage" which hasn't been a part of this conversation. several more on suicide, which hasn't been a part of this conversation.

so tell me, what part of this article am i supposed to take seriously, exactly? because absolutely none of really backs up the suggestion that steroids are completely safe in any environment.

Finsfan79
12-13-2006, 01:55 PM
How ironic, Jason Taylor and the Dolphins steal protection signals. I wonder how many people think that his "cheating" invalidates his DPOY chances. :roll:

Can you be a little more blantantly a homer?

:lol:

Moses
12-13-2006, 01:59 PM
certain steroid users claim they're fine? are you kidding? certain cigarette smokers have told me that they're not unhealthy. so everyone should light up, right? please.

and it's a bloody medical article used for doctors who are prescribing the steroid for users, it's not a media clip that i quoted. for christ's sake. the rationalization is amazing.

Except you have study after study that have definitively linked cigarette smoking to all sorts of health problems, and few such studies have done the same for steroids.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anabolic_steroid#Popular_misconceptions

"Another common misconception purveyed in popular culture and the media include the myth that anabolic steroids are highly dangerous and users' mortality rates are high. Anabolic steroids are used widely in the medical field without any serious health risks to users[32][33][34], and no scientific evidence has shown any long-term serious health defects from correct use of anabolic steroids. While risk of death is present in many drugs, the risk of premature death from use of anabolic steroids seems to be extremely low.[35] It is possible this myth gained popularity from claims that Lyle Alzado died from brain cancer caused by anabolic steroids. Alzado himself had claimed that his cancer was caused by anabolic steroids. However, there is no medical evidence anabolic steroids can cause brain cancer and Alzado's own doctors admitted anabolic steroids had nothing to do with his death.[36]"

Nice. You cite an "encyclopedia" that is written by internet users. Way to back up your argment.

One that is properly referenced 57 times :roll:

Don't let that stop you though.

You are dillusional if you think anabolic steroids aren't a major health risk. Yes, medical professionals use them to treat illnesses. This has NOTHING to do with the way athletes use steroids to maximize performance. They are completely different things. If steroids could be used without any health risks, people would be using them like vitamins.

Moses
12-13-2006, 02:00 PM
How ironic, Jason Taylor and the Dolphins steal protection signals. I wonder how many people think that his "cheating" invalidates his DPOY chances. :roll:

Can you be a little more blantantly a homer?

:lol:

Right, and every player in the NFL should be suspended for watching game film.

San Diego Chicken
12-13-2006, 05:28 PM
How ironic, Jason Taylor and the Dolphins steal protection signals. I wonder how many people think that his "cheating" invalidates his DPOY chances. :roll:

Can you be a little more blantantly a homer?

:lol:


That was called sarcasm.

And I merely offered a different viewpoint of the steroid issue for those questioning the veracity of the sources. You can believe what you wish to believe.

draftguru151
12-13-2006, 05:57 PM
Wow, this thread has turned into a complete joke.

nobodyinparticular
12-13-2006, 11:47 PM
How ironic, Jason Taylor and the Dolphins steal protection signals. I wonder how many people think that his "cheating" invalidates his DPOY chances. :roll:

Can you be a little more blantantly a homer?

:lol:


That was called sarcasm.

And I merely offered a different viewpoint of the steroid issue for those questioning the veracity of the sources. You can believe what you wish to believe.

Yes, and you can believe that the earth is flat all you want, but it still does not make it true, now does it? Does it change the facts of the issue? You can believe that you are physically able to jump off of a building unaided and fly like a bird. But the stunning reality will be that, depending on the height of your jump, a few second/minutes later, you will splat on the ground.

Belief does not change fact.

Mr. Stiller
12-14-2006, 05:32 AM
How ironic, Jason Taylor and the Dolphins steal protection signals. I wonder how many people think that his "cheating" invalidates his DPOY chances. :roll:

Can you be a little more blantantly a homer?

:lol:


That was called sarcasm.

And I merely offered a different viewpoint of the steroid issue for those questioning the veracity of the sources. You can believe what you wish to believe.

Yes, and you can believe that the earth is flat all you want, but it still does not make it true, now does it? Does it change the facts of the issue? You can believe that you are physically able to jump off of a building unaided and fly like a bird. But the stunning reality will be that, depending on the height of your jump, a few second/minutes later, you will splat on the ground.

Belief does not change fact.


How does a guy using Legal video aids.... compare to a guy busted for taking illegal substances. Jason Taylor didn't get busted for Steroids, he used video tape that is by all means legal... just because Dolphins are the one that used it and won... is no reason that someone that took steroids should get it.

draftguru151
12-14-2006, 08:39 AM
How ironic, Jason Taylor and the Dolphins steal protection signals. I wonder how many people think that his "cheating" invalidates his DPOY chances. :roll:

Can you be a little more blantantly a homer?

:lol:


That was called sarcasm.

And I merely offered a different viewpoint of the steroid issue for those questioning the veracity of the sources. You can believe what you wish to believe.

Yes, and you can believe that the earth is flat all you want, but it still does not make it true, now does it? Does it change the facts of the issue? You can believe that you are physically able to jump off of a building unaided and fly like a bird. But the stunning reality will be that, depending on the height of your jump, a few second/minutes later, you will splat on the ground.

Belief does not change fact.

Well there are certain studies with quantum physics and such that try to argue other wise, but that is a different story. :lol:

bigbluedefense
12-14-2006, 11:01 AM
Wow, this thread has gone to ****.

njx9
12-14-2006, 11:07 AM
Wow, this thread has gone to ***********.

are you implying that it started out someplace else?

bigbluedefense
12-14-2006, 11:10 AM
Wow, this thread has gone to ***********.

are you implying that it started out someplace else?

I think most people misinterpreted my question. I asked if he's worthy of consideration for DPOY. I wasn't lobbying for it. In terms of production, I say yes, he is worthy, but factor in the steroid issues, I say he doesn't deserve it.

Then the thread became a steroid thread and ethics, no one is debating that steroids is illegal etc, the purpose of the thread was to ask if his game warranted consideration for the award. It got misinterpreted and the thread went to you know what.

njx9
12-14-2006, 11:15 AM
Wow, this thread has gone to ***********.

are you implying that it started out someplace else?

I think most people misinterpreted my question. I asked if he's worthy of consideration for DPOY. I wasn't lobbying for it. In terms of production, I say yes, he is worthy, but factor in the steroid issues, I say he doesn't deserve it.

Then the thread became a steroid thread and ethics, no one is debating that steroids is illegal etc, the purpose of the thread was to ask if his game warranted consideration for the award. It got misinterpreted and the thread went to you know what.

i don't think anyone would argue that, if you'd just posted his numbers without a name, he'd be, at worst, a close second (i still think taylor's been a better player, but it's not by more than a hair), so the argument changed to something a bit mroe debatable. *shrug* at least you inspired passioned debate.