PDA

View Full Version : Steroids


jack1077
06-10-2011, 12:21 AM
So, what do we all think is the percentage of usage in the NFL? I'm of the 50% of players do. I've seen several articles stating that over 150 former players have admitted to using them, and they implied that at least half the locker room joined them. It's really sad that the NFLPA is actually arguing against the HGH testing to by done by the NFL not the teams in the CBA.

I sincerely hope the game doesn't suffer the same fate as baseball, but at the same time, I think its sickening to think that the usage is so high. Your thoughts?

Roddoliver
06-10-2011, 12:45 AM
Steroids are a huge part of modern football. In the past, a DT had 250 pounds. Today, that's a LB. Players are getting bigger, faster and stronger than ever. We see more and more "physical freaks". The NFLPA does not want a more effective test for HGH because, guess what... A lot of players use it! Football is strenght, hard hits (or it used to be before Goodell) and point of attack. Players start dealing with steroids even before they get to the NFL. And the tests done by the NFL are a joke, after all they can't suspend the whole league. Who does not take steroids in pro football? Some kickers, punters and Kyle Orton?

descendency
06-10-2011, 01:04 AM
I'm a huge believer that most of the NFL is on something. I just don't believe that men should be that big, fast, and strong naturally.

Basically, people are playing as long but just at 30-50+lbs heavier while being faster and stronger. Something has to give. The human body hasn't evolved that much in 40 years.

That said, you are as guilty or innocent as the sport lets you be. The testing policy implemented is what determines how much you can and can't do. It may be against the rules, but when there isn't a test for something you are almost forced to consider it.

Caddy
06-10-2011, 01:37 AM
I just don't buy the argument that because players in the past were smaller, current day guys should too. Sports nutrition has come a long way, sports medicine has come a long way and the players are now essentially full time gym rats whereis in the past this was not as possible.

However, in saying that I bet there is more than a handful of player who are abusing the system.

Bengalsrocket
06-10-2011, 03:15 AM
I just don't buy the argument that because players in the past were smaller, current day guys should too. Sports nutrition has come a long way, sports medicine has come a long way and the players are now essentially full time gym rats whereis in the past this was not as possible.

However, in saying that I bet there is more than a handful of player who are abusing the system.

I too agree that it's not impossible for any player to be the current size / speed combination that they are without performance enhancing drugs.

However, I'm sure there are a lot of players that take them. If someone has an edge over you, naturally or unnaturally, it's probably fairly tempting to take a drug that will help you catch up in terms of physique or even possibly get an edge on them. When your pay check is directly effected by how well you line up against the competition, I can see how someone could fall into the trap of "cheating".

Edit: just realized how quickly I got off topic :P The following doesn't really have much to do with steroids (well, it kind of does but not entirely)

I don't have the answers to fix all the physical problems that are associated with football players. If setting weight limits for positions or something would help these guys in their post football career lives, I would be on board. I'm hugely disgusted by all the reports of linemen who either die or have 8 knee surgeries and can't walk anymore after their career is over because weight management is so difficult for these guys.

Woody56
06-10-2011, 03:35 AM
Steroids are nothing new in the NFL. I would actually say the steroid use in the 70's, especially with the Steelers, is a lot higher than today.

jack1077
06-10-2011, 04:34 AM
I think something is going to give at some stage. When the curtain is lifted, its going to be very very ugly. I don't think it is impossible at all for a player to get to that weight and speed, its just that it is very rare that a person could naturally attain it. Weight lifting and protein supplements have changed the way the game is played as well. It isn't impossible, just very difficult. I would love to believe that someone like Ray Lewis isn't on the roids, but the more years he plays, the more i think he probably is. You can't keep getting hit like that, abusing your body for that long and just keep coming back at a similar level. Does anyone think Reggie White was on roids? That guy looked like a man among boys, at the very peak of physical competition. Was it natural? Or conconted in a lab?

My whole argument against steroids is that i want to watch humans compete. Not HGH strain 132 against HGH strain 431.

TACKLE
06-10-2011, 04:44 AM
On the topic of steroids, I can't help but think steroids (and other banned substances) may be pretty rampant right now during the lockout. There's no testing at the moment and all guys are doing now is working out and chillin out. There's nothing stopping these guys from using performance enhancing or "recreational" drugs.

jack1077
06-10-2011, 08:31 AM
On the topic of steroids, I can't help but think steroids (and other banned substances) may be pretty rampant right now during the lockout. There's no testing at the moment and all guys are doing now is working out and chillin out. There's nothing stopping these guys from using performance enhancing or "recreational" drugs.

I think if i were an nfl player and had played for 5 + seasons, i would probably smoke pot at this time. I'm sure the majority of them do it in the offseason anyway, but at this point, there really are no repercussions.

EricCartmann
06-10-2011, 10:02 AM
Even back in the 90's, one of my HS friends who was a D1 college prospect, finally admitted, like 20 years later, he took steroids in both HS and college. He believed all the top prospects from all the HS did.

Guys who take them tend to keep it on the Down low for the most part. It's not something you really want to talk about. You don't want to rat out yourself and your friends.

What he told me is like what you hear and see on TV when they interview former steroid users. Your training will eventually peak and it can get frustrating.. so what do you do? just by taking a couple of injections, you will instantly bench 5 lbs over your peak, and instantly become quicker and faster. When you are competing with other top recruits for a premium spot at one of the major football programs you have no choice. The rewards way outweigh the risk.

In College it goes to a higher level, and the steroids gets more abundant and even more complex, and why should it not? Here, you are competing for a chance of becoming a high draftee and getting millions of dollars.

Now move onto the NFL, I don't see it slowing down. But because there is some form of testing, you have to have a better cocktail and learn the testing schedules, but other than that, it's business as usual for the steroids users, which I think is close to 100% if not 100%.

My personal take is I really don't care, you still need 99.9995% great genetics to play in the NFL. For 99.99999995% of us, we still will not make it in the NFL no matter how much steroids we take.

Matthew Jones
06-10-2011, 10:15 AM
The best part is that people will vehemently deny that their team's best players are on steroids, but if steroids are widespread and really give users a significant, unfair advantage over players who don't use them, could we reasonably assume that someone who isn't on steroids could be one of the best players in the league?

jack1077
06-10-2011, 11:22 AM
Even back in the 90's, one of my HS friends who was a D1 college prospect, finally admitted, like 20 years later, he took steroids in both HS and college. He believed all the top prospects from all the HS did.

Guys who take them tend to keep it on the Down low for the most part. It's not something you really want to talk about. You don't want to rat out yourself and your friends.

What he told me is like what you hear and see on TV when they interview former steroid users. Your training will eventually peak and it can get frustrating.. so what do you do? just by taking a couple of injections, you will instantly bench 5 lbs over your peak, and instantly become quicker and faster. When you are competing with other top recruits for a premium spot at one of the major football programs you have no choice. The rewards way outweigh the risk.

In College it goes to a higher level, and the steroids gets more abundant and even more complex, and why should it not? Here, you are competing for a chance of becoming a high draftee and getting millions of dollars.

Now move onto the NFL, I don't see it slowing down. But because there is some form of testing, you have to have a better cocktail and learn the testing schedules, but other than that, it's business as usual for the steroids users, which I think is close to 100% if not 100%.

My personal take is I really don't care, you still need 99.9995% great genetics to play in the NFL. For 99.99999995% of us, we still will not make it in the NFL no matter how much steroids we take.

I seriously don't think it is at 100%. I believe it is a higher rate than people are willing to admit but 100% would be impossible. I think its definitely between 50-75%.The thing is, i for some reason don't think players like Peppers are on roids. I think Pepp is just this freak that defy's all logic, much like Reggie White. BTW, i'm a packer fan, so i'm not fan boying here.

I have a feeling that the Claymaker is probably on roids. He gained so much between high school and college. Something like 60 lbs. I know its not unheard of, but even still.

I do have a problem with it. Steroids make competition redundant. You are no longer competing against other people. You are not you. You are a concoction made in a lab trying to beat the other scientists concoction. When this happens, i think i may as well go and watch robot fighting, for that's about as organic and interesting as it gets when everyone's on the roids.

FlyingElvis
06-10-2011, 11:31 AM
I won't even try to guess a % but there's no name that could be tied to PEDs that would surprise me. My guess is the only guys that are definitely not using are kickers, but even some of them could be.

jack1077
06-10-2011, 11:38 AM
I won't even try to guess a % but there's no name that could be tied to PEDs that would surprise me. My guess is the only guys that are definitely not using are kickers, but even some of them could be.

The saddest part is, us the fans don't give a ****. Just win baby. Any other sport, people actually care, for some reason with football people just turn off and say that's the way it is. Quite saddening imho. It is going to come out eventually, and I mean the **** is really going to hit the fan when virtually every player is standing in front of a grand jury saying, "i took something, how was i meant to know it was steroids?"

FlyingElvis
06-10-2011, 11:49 AM
IDK . . . I don't feel at all like it's hidden, so I don't see a scenario where the **** hits the fan.

The NFL has had plenty of run-ins w/steroids and HGH along it's history. Alzado, Romanowski & Harrison alone span a few decades. Hell, Romanowski was part of the Balco mess.

The NFL has always at least pretended it didn't want steroids in the game. That seems to be the big difference. Baseball wasn't even testing at all and even had policies that allowed some PEDs to be within the rules.

killxswitch
06-10-2011, 12:35 PM
I don't agree that roids remove competition. Roids enhance, but they don't make a bad player a great player. Think about the no-name guys that have gotten popped for roids. You don't hear that much about them but if you search for it you can find LBs and linemen that were suspended for PEDs that haven't done anything and never went on to do anything.

People point to Tony Mandarich or Shawn Merriman as examples of great players that stopped taking roids and sucked. But Mandarich became hooked on pain killers and was high all the time as a player in the NFL. Merriman played a full season on a torn MCL and it ruined his knee.

I think PEDs enhance what is already there. They don't make a crappy player an all-pro.

EricCartmann
06-10-2011, 12:53 PM
I seriously don't think it is at 100%. I believe it is a higher rate than people are willing to admit but 100% would be impossible. I think its definitely between 50-75%.The thing is, i for some reason don't think players like Peppers are on roids. I think Pepp is just this freak that defy's all logic, much like Reggie White. BTW, i'm a packer fan, so i'm not fan boying here.

I have a feeling that the Claymaker is probably on roids. He gained so much between high school and college. Something like 60 lbs. I know its not unheard of, but even still.

I do have a problem with it. Steroids make competition redundant. You are no longer competing against other people. You are not you. You are a concoction made in a lab trying to beat the other scientists concoction. When this happens, i think i may as well go and watch robot fighting, for that's about as organic and interesting as it gets when everyone's on the roids.


Football is a game of inches, but what is also not mentioned is it is also a game of ounces.

If you had an easy but risky way to be a little stronger, and a little faster, and all it took was just a little risk to make millions more, would you not take the risk? I will admit that I would be a fool if I did not at least consider it.

Say if you were already a Pro-Bowler without steroids, but with steroids you would be a Hall-of-Famer, with endorsements for life, would you not at least consider it?

I am just using the word "steroids" here, but what I should use for a word is PEDs (performance enhancing drugs). Where is the line of what should be allowed and what is not? Even whole milk you buy at the grocery store can be considered a PED. If you do have a list of "allowed drugs" guys will just invent cocktails to make it on the allowed drugs. From the outside, it's easy to say these guys who use PED's are "cheaters", but I don't see it this way. I just see it as guys caught in a system, and they do what they have to do to survive. Like I said, 99.999999% of any sport is great genetics, so by using PED's just gives them that extra .00001% to perform at a higher lever and be a Hall-of-Famer.

You can say that well we "should just ban everything outright". The problem with this reasoning is we already do, and "cheaters" still exists. If you ain't cheatin you ain't trying.

Or another idea is "we should have stricter testing", the problem with this is the "cheaters" will just find ways around the testing, much like Lance did.

"Laws only punishes good people, a good just man does not need laws, but criminals will always find their way around them" -- Plato, ~400 BC.

Oh and one last thing, you guys can continue to believe the world is this perfect place and Santa Claus is real all you want. This is probably the best approach, because ignorance is truly bliss... As for myself, I have just accepted the fact that Santa Claus is not real.

jack1077
06-10-2011, 01:08 PM
I don't agree that roids remove competition. Roids enhance, but they don't make a bad player a great player. Think about the no-name guys that have gotten popped for roids. You don't hear that much about them but if you search for it you can find LBs and linemen that were suspended for PEDs that haven't done anything and never went on to do anything.

People point to Tony Mandarich or Shawn Merriman as examples of great players that stopped taking roids and sucked. But Mandarich became hooked on pain killers and was high all the time as a player in the NFL. Merriman played a full season on a torn MCL and it ruined his knee.

I think PEDs enhance what is already there. They don't make a crappy player an all-pro.

Yes, steroids enhance, but they are only needed because you know the guy across from you is using them. You use them because it give you the chance to compete. The thing is, he takes something, you take something. Adds a little T booster, so do you. he adds a little HGH, so do you. It gets to the point where we are no longer watching humans. We are watching human frames getting pumped full of fuel, and cheering for our fuel to win. You cease to be a human playing sport when on PED's. You are the PED itself competing against the other PED's. The issue is, if the guy across from you didn't use them, then you wouldn't have too either.

Everyone in the NFL is gifted. Every single player. My point is, if the B athlete takes steroids and becomes a B+ athlete, then he cheated the B athlete who didn't take steroids. And, his stats are null and void because everything he attained was tainted by roids.

Iamcanadian
06-10-2011, 01:21 PM
I am a realist and 20 years ago, I'd say close to a 100% were on roids since it was the only way to stay in the league and there was no testing.
However, today is a totally different story and it is much more difficult to be on roids and get away with it. In the off season, who knows but during the season, random testing pretty well eliminates its use.
As for the size of players, few lifted weights till the 70's and it was almost non existent in college. Today kids start with the weights in public school so it isn't surprising that players can handle 20-50lbs without a lot of effort. Also, the money involved has most taller kids getting serious about sports at a much earlier stage and basically skill position players of relatively the same height as those of the 50's really aren't bigger, you just see more taller and heavier WR's who can carry more weight.
A lot of the added speed comes from weight training and training in general. Back in the 50's players simply showed up to training camp out of shape and worked themselves into condition as the season went along, today it is a 365 day regimen.
I know in hockey, the players had off season jobs because pro sports didn't pay them enough to survive on for 12 months of the year and I'm pretty sure pro football was a similar situation.

jack1077
06-10-2011, 01:29 PM
Football is a game of inches, but what is also not mentioned is it is also a game of ounces.

If you had an easy but risky way to be a little stronger, and a little faster, and all it took was just a little risk to make millions more, would you not take the risk? I will admit that I would be a fool if I did not at least consider it.

Say if you were already a Pro-Bowler without steroids, but with steroids you would be a Hall-of-Famer, with endorsements for life, would you not at least consider it?

I am just using the word "steroids" here, but what I should use for a word is PEDs (performance enhancing drugs). Where is the line of what should be allowed and what is not? Even whole milk you buy at the grocery store can be considered a PED. If you do have a list of "allowed drugs" guys will just invent cocktails to make it on the allowed drugs. From the outside, it's easy to say these guys who use PED's are "cheaters", but I don't see it this way. I just see it as guys caught in a system, and they do what they have to do to survive. Like I said, 99.999999% of any sport is great genetics, so by using PED's just gives them that extra .00001% to perform at a higher lever and be a Hall-of-Famer.

********. You do not need great genetics to succeed in soccer, golf, baseball etc. If you are 5'0 or 7'0 it doesn't matter, can you hit the ball? You do not even need great genetics to succeed in the NBA. Of course it helps but look at bugsy mogues. 5'6. Nate Robinson. 5'9. Genetics don't mean **** in a lot of sports. In football, it is different but even still, It is not impossible to gain weight without steroids. I believe you are the same person who in a different forum was posting about how Megatron was overrated. And you repeatedly pointed out that you don't need to be the fastest, just fast enough. Well, i doubt Jerry Rice ever ran a 4.4 but he was still the best WR ever. He didn't blaze and there are plenty of people who have his speed in the world. His Genetics didn't make him into the best WR ever (they helped) but his understanding and dedication to football were his strongest suits. Yes, lets ban whole milk, that makes sense? Ridiculous argument.

You can say that well we "should just ban everything outright". The problem with this reasoning is we already do, and "cheaters" still exists. If you ain't cheatin you ain't trying.

Or another idea is "we should have stricter testing", the problem with this is the "cheaters" will just find ways around the testing, much like Lance did.

Test testostorone levels throughout the season. Don't give the players notice on when you are going to test and what you are going to test for. Fixed.

"Laws only punishes good people, a good just man does not need laws, but criminals will always find their way around them" -- Plato, ~400 BC.

Slow clap. Yes, you quoted Plato. Obviously you must be right. Everyone should ignore steroid use now.

Oh and one last thing, you guys can continue to believe the world is this perfect place and Santa Claus is real all you want. This is probably the best approach, because ignorance is truly bliss... As for myself, I have just accepted the fact that Santa Claus is not real.


I am well aware that steroid use is rampant, i just think its ridiculous. If we took away steroids from players, we would see who are the star players. if Ray Lewis dominates on and off roids, what's the harm? My point is, its only and advantage if we, the fan, let it continue. The fans have to get off their asses and actually demand something of the NFL. Every other sport in the world, the fan hates steroids use. Cycling is a joke (like my pun there). Baseball was a joke. Marion Jones. Disgraced. Barry Bonds. Disgraced. But the NFL, the sport that has more roids use than any other is forgiven for some reason? Why? Shawne Merriman. When will he be back!? Our pass rush is lacking. Brian Cushing. Well, we caught him on roids but this is football, he can still win DROY.

jack1077
06-10-2011, 01:45 PM
I am a realist and 20 years ago, I'd say close to a 100% were on roids since it was the only way to stay in the league and there was no testing.
However, today is a totally different story and it is much more difficult to be on roids and get away with it. In the off season, who knows but during the season, random testing pretty well eliminates its use.
As for the size of players, few lifted weights till the 70's and it was almost non existent in college. Today kids start with the weights in public school so it isn't surprising that players can handle 20-50lbs without a lot of effort. Also, the money involved has most taller kids getting serious about sports at a much earlier stage and basically skill position players of relatively the same height as those of the 50's really aren't bigger, you just see more taller and heavier WR's who can carry more weight.
A lot of the added speed comes from weight training and training in general. Back in the 50's players simply showed up to training camp out of shape and worked themselves into condition as the season went along, today it is a 365 day regimen.
I know in hockey, the players had off season jobs because pro sports didn't pay them enough to survive on for 12 months of the year and I'm pretty sure pro football was a similar situation.

It's very easy to get through the testing, especially when the nfl tells the teams when there testing and what they are testing for.

I completely agree with adding weight though. The inclusion of Creatine and Protein supplements makes weight gain a lot easier than it used to be.

FUNBUNCHER
06-10-2011, 04:42 PM
WHole milk is NOT a performance enhancing drug.lol

PEDs have to give an athlete a significant competitive advantage over a similarly skilled athlete who's clean.

Eating plain old FOOD isn't a PED.

IMO most players who take PEDs do so with the intent of gaining weight, maybe gain a slight increase in speed.

Unlike baseball, where jacking one or two variables, bat speed and torque power, can make a decent hitter's HR numbers jump 50%, football isn't quite like that.

Too much technique, skill development and execution is involved in football to believe taking PEDs will make a special teamer a pro-bowler.

PEDs simply raise the floor in the NFL, but taking them won't turn a safety scrub into Polamalu.
PEDs don't give you INSTINCTS.

Sports nutrition/training hasn't made quantum leaps since the mid-nineties, neither has human evolution.

Ray Lewis had all the intangibles and raw athletic ability to be a pro bowl 'backer coming out of Miami. But I think he was something like 230-235# as a rookie.

During the Ravens SB run, he was 255-260# and one of the fastest LBs in the league.

Do I think at some point Ray cycled PEDs?? Probably. Does it make him less of a gifted football athlete?? Not really.

Now if a RS freshman like CMIII or Brian Cushing at USC hear 'rumors' about Ray Lewis and his alleged PED usage, what kind of decision making process are they going through about the 'morality' of taking PEDs??

IMO the NFL still has genuine freaks; Peppers was roughly the same size since his sophomore year at UNC and LaMarr Woodley has been a thick legged, bigbutt DE/LB since forever. Most QBs don't have a need to be hyper-muscular and can make sufficient gains working out clean.

But everyone else, it's every man out for himself.

The NFL really screwed the pooch on strenuous drug testing the last 30 years, and the reason why I hope the rumors are true that WADA is going to conduct NFL drug tests in the future.

Most football fans IMO wouldn't have a problem watching today's NFL players looking like they did in the early 1980s. That way it would be easier to appreciate the truly gifted athletes dominate the game, guys like Megatron, Chris Johnson and Julius Peppers, etc.

My bet for the biggest abusers of PEDs in the NFL; Lineman and LBs with safeties a distant third.

Biggest myth/cover-up in pro sports in PED usage in the NFL.

EricCartmann
06-10-2011, 05:10 PM
Yes, steroids enhance, but they are only needed because you know the guy across from you is using them. You use them because it give you the chance to compete. The thing is, he takes something, you take something. Adds a little T booster, so do you. he adds a little HGH, so do you. It gets to the point where we are no longer watching humans. We are watching human frames getting pumped full of fuel, and cheering for our fuel to win. You cease to be a human playing sport when on PED's. You are the PED itself competing against the other PED's. The issue is, if the guy across from you didn't use them, then you wouldn't have too either.


Well you can take it all you want, I seriously doubt you will ever play in the NFL.

I am open to ideas how you are going to stop everyone from using it?




********. You do not need great genetics to succeed in soccer, golf, baseball etc. If you are 5'0 or 7'0 it doesn't matter, can you hit the ball? You do not even need great genetics to succeed in the NBA. Of course it helps but look at bugsy mogues. 5'6. Nate Robinson. 5'9. Genetics don't mean **** in a lot of sports. In football, it is different but even still, It is not impossible to gain weight without steroids. I believe you are the same person who in a different forum was posting about how Megatron was overrated. And you repeatedly pointed out that you don't need to be the fastest, just fast enough. Well, i doubt Jerry Rice ever ran a 4.4 but he was still the best WR ever. He didn't blaze and there are plenty of people who have his speed in the world. His Genetics didn't make him into the best WR ever (they helped) but his understanding and dedication to football were his strongest suits. Yes, lets ban whole milk, that makes sense? Ridiculous argument.


Good genetics does not just mean height and weight. Quickness and coordination also play a part. The guys you mentioned above all have good genetics, they did not have size, but they something more important, which is coordination and quickness. They had at least some base genetics to get them to play pro sports. I will agree, Hardwork plays the biggest part in all this, but being faster and stronger also helps you get closer to your goals.



Test testostorone levels throughout the season. Don't give the players notice on when you are going to test and what you are going to test for. Fixed.


LOL. That's all we got to do? There will always be ways around the testing. Testing is not as easy as you think, and players have developed ways to quickly get rid of "contaminates" from their bodies. Besides, there are plenty of PED's that do not involve testosterone. So all you did was create a alternate PED.



Slow clap. Yes, you quoted Plato. Obviously you must be right. Everyone should ignore steroid use now.

I know that's a strange concept to most, but it's really the only solution. By ignoring it, then it really does become an even playing field.

My feeling is there is really no way to police steroid use. You can try, and all it does is create more cheaters. Eventually you will even ban Legitimate players who naturally produce chemicals that the PED's do.

It's still 99.99999% genetics anyways that will get you there, no matter what PED's you take.

EricCartmann
06-10-2011, 05:12 PM
WHole milk is NOT a performance enhancing drug.lol


Whole milk as we know it is not natural.

How about we classify any drug that increases muscle mass as a "vitamin" instead of a "drug".. PROBLEM SOLVED!!!! HAAHAHAHAAHAHH

EricCartmann
06-10-2011, 05:15 PM
Who draws the line? Do you guys even know what PED's are? Expert Nutritionists even admit that sometimes they do not know what is a PED or what is not.

From Wiki:
---------------------

Types of performance-enhancing drugs
Although the phrase performance-enhancing drugs is used in reference to anabolic steroids or their precursors, world anti-doping organizations apply the term broadly. The phrase has been used to refer to several distinct classes of drugs:

Lean mass builders are used to drive or amplify the growth of muscle and lean body mass, and sometimes to reduce body fat. This class of drugs includes anabolic steroids, beta-2 agonists, selective androgen receptor modulators (SARMs), and various human hormones, most notably human growth hormone, as well as some of their precursors.

Stimulants are used by athletes to stimulate their body and mind to perform at optimal level by increasing focus, energy, and aggression. Examples include amphetamine and methamphetamine.

Painkillers mask athletes' pain so they can continue to compete and perform beyond their usual pain thresholds. Blood pressure is increased causing the cells in the muscles to be better supplied with vital oxygen. Painkillers used by athletes range from common over-the-counter medicines such as NSAIDs (such as ibuprofen) to powerful prescription narcotics.

Sedatives are sometimes used by athletes in sports like archery which require steady hands and accurate aim, and also by athletes attempting to overcome excessive nervousness or discomfort. ****** and marijuana are examples.

Diuretics expel water from athletes' bodies. They are often used by athletes such as wrestlers, who need to meet weight restrictions. Many stimulants also have secondary diuretic effect.

Masking drugs are used to prevent the detection of other classes of drugs. These evolve as quickly as do testing methods - which is very quickly indeed[1] - although a time-tested classic example is the use of epitestosterone, a drug with no performance-enhancing effects, to restore the testosterone/epitestosterone ratio (a common criterion in steroid testing) to normal levels after anabolic steroid supplementation.

The classification of substances as performance-enhancing drugs is not entirely clear-cut and objective. As in other types of categorization, certain prototype performance enhancers that are universally classified as such (like anabolic steroids), whereas other substances (like vitamins and protein supplements) are virtually never classified as performance enhancers despite their significant effects on athletes' performance. As is usual with categorization, there are borderline cases; caffeine, for example, is considered a performance enhancer by some athletic authorities but not others.[2]

FUNBUNCHER
06-10-2011, 05:55 PM
There are effective testing regimens that WADA could 'adjust' for the NFL, (painkillers, stimulants like caffeine,etc.,) there isn't this massive 'grey area' about what is or what isn't considered a PED.


PEDs advocates love to argue just about ANYTHING an athlete puts into their mouths is a PED, not true.

Protein powders are meal replacements. Creatine has negligible impact for most weight lifters. Most painkillers prescribed by team physicians are necessary and acceptable IMO, but if you need them, you aren't likely playing at peak level.

Anything else that allows you to put on 25 pounds of lean muscle as an adult in 8-12 weeks should be banned.

EricCartmann
06-10-2011, 05:57 PM
There are effective testing regimens that WADA could 'adjust' for the NFL, (painkillers, stimulants like caffeine,etc.,) there isn't this massive 'grey area' about what is or what isn't considered a PED.


PEDs advocates love to argue just about ANYTHING an athlete puts into their mouths is a PED, not true.

Protein powders are meal replacements. Creatine has negligible impact for most weight lifters. Most painkillers prescribed by team physicians are necessary and acceptable IMO, but if you need them, you aren't likely playing at peak level.

Anything else that allows you to put on 25 pounds of lean muscle as an adult in 8-12 weeks should be banned.


You seem to have it figured out. How come the NFL just does not consult you?

FUNBUNCHER
06-10-2011, 06:25 PM
You seem to have it figured out. How come the NFL just does not consult you?

Sarcasm aside, the NFL executive offices seem to think bigger/faster/stronger players equals a better product on the field which equates to more revenue in their pockets.

But I think most fans could live with 235-240# LBs, 275-285# OTs, 200# WRs and 280# DTs.

It's bad for the sport from Pop Warner on up when the NFL sells the myth that all the supersized athletes playing on Sundays are 'natural' and that their size is attainable through chemically free methods.

jack1077
06-11-2011, 12:16 AM
WHole milk is NOT a performance enhancing drug.lol

PEDs have to give an athlete a significant competitive advantage over a similarly skilled athlete who's clean.

Eating plain old FOOD isn't a PED.

IMO most players who take PEDs do so with the intent of gaining weight, maybe gain a slight increase in speed.

Unlike baseball, where jacking one or two variables, bat speed and torque power, can make a decent hitter's HR numbers jump 50%, football isn't quite like that.

Too much technique, skill development and execution is involved in football to believe taking PEDs will make a special teamer a pro-bowler.

PEDs simply raise the floor in the NFL, but taking them won't turn a safety scrub into Polamalu.
PEDs don't give you INSTINCTS.

Sports nutrition/training hasn't made quantum leaps since the mid-nineties, neither has human evolution.

Ray Lewis had all the intangibles and raw athletic ability to be a pro bowl 'backer coming out of Miami. But I think he was something like 230-235# as a rookie.

During the Ravens SB run, he was 255-260# and one of the fastest LBs in the league.

Do I think at some point Ray cycled PEDs?? Probably. Does it make him less of a gifted football athlete?? Not really.

My point is, he only would take them because he thought the other guys took them. If everyone was clean he would have remained at 235 and still been dominating but the steroids would give him the even playing field. Honestly, i prefer my even playing field clean than roided. If everyone stopped, no one would nee them.

Now if a RS freshman like CMIII or Brian Cushing at USC hear 'rumors' about Ray Lewis and his alleged PED usage, what kind of decision making process are they going through about the 'morality' of taking PEDs??

IMO the NFL still has genuine freaks; Peppers was roughly the same size since his sophomore year at UNC and LaMarr Woodley has been a thick legged, bigbutt DE/LB since forever. Most QBs don't have a need to be hyper-muscular and can make sufficient gains working out clean.

But everyone else, it's every man out for himself.

The NFL really screwed the pooch on strenuous drug testing the last 30 years, and the reason why I hope the rumors are true that WADA is going to conduct NFL drug tests in the future.

Most football fans IMO wouldn't have a problem watching today's NFL players looking like they did in the early 1980s. That way it would be easier to appreciate the truly gifted athletes dominate the game, guys like Megatron, Chris Johnson and Julius Peppers, etc.

My bet for the biggest abusers of PEDs in the NFL; Lineman and LBs with safeties a distant third.

Biggest myth/cover-up in pro sports in PED usage in the NFL.

Completely agree with this. Its the most not talked about topic in pro sports.

jack1077
06-11-2011, 12:31 AM
Well you can take it all you want, I seriously doubt you will ever play in the NFL.

I am open to ideas how you are going to stop everyone from using it?





Good genetics does not just mean height and weight. Quickness and coordination also play a part. The guys you mentioned above all have good genetics, they did not have size, but they something more important, which is coordination and quickness. They had at least some base genetics to get them to play pro sports. I will agree, Hardwork plays the biggest part in all this, but being faster and stronger also helps you get closer to your goals.




LOL. That's all we got to do? There will always be ways around the testing. Testing is not as easy as you think, and players have developed ways to quickly get rid of "contaminates" from their bodies. Besides, there are plenty of PED's that do not involve testosterone. So all you did was create a alternate PED.



I know that's a strange concept to most, but it's really the only solution. By ignoring it, then it really does become an even playing field.

My feeling is there is really no way to police steroid use. You can try, and all it does is create more cheaters. Eventually you will even ban Legitimate players who naturally produce chemicals that the PED's do.

It's still 99.99999% genetics anyways that will get you there, no matter what PED's you take.

I think virtually everything funbuncher said is accurate. I'd just be repeating his words for i share his opinions but i will expand on oa few things.

It does not take 99.99999999% genetics to play in the nfl. Genetics obviously help but they do not give you the hard work it takes. Every single athlete in the nfl worked their ass off. Genetics will always help but you mentioned coordination. People learn coordination. You can even learn to improve quickness easily.

You say "its hard for me to understand". I have heard your "even playing field" argument before. Here is mine, if everyone is on roids, then its an even playing field, if everyone isn't, then it is also an even playing field. Basically what you are advocating is these players taking as many PED's as their bodies can handle just to be able to COMPETE. Why? Would the product be diminished if no one was on roids? No.

Oh and i could actually be big enough to play in the NFL. I would of course never be fast enough to be a corner at my current size but if i kept adding to my frame i would be a linebacker, similar size to London Fletcher. I would however lack the years of TRAINING it takes to succeed.

EricCartmann
06-11-2011, 03:55 PM
This is going to be a great thread!

I see we have the Chief of the Moral Police here, and a PhD in Nutrition. I promise to be back and get back to each and every one of your guys points.

FUNBUNCHER
06-11-2011, 05:03 PM
This is going to be a great thread!

I see we have the Chief of the Moral Police here, and a PhD in Nutrition. I promise to be back and get back to each and every one of your guys points.

Don't be a jerk, dude. I don't need you to grade my work.

If you have an opinion, share it. Condescension is a waste of time.

jack1077
06-12-2011, 02:54 AM
Don't be a jerk, dude. I don't need you to grade my work.

If you have an opinion, share it. Condescension is a waste of time.

I think this dude has won the 'biggest dick' award on these forums in his last 2 weeks on here.

jack1077
06-12-2011, 03:03 AM
This is going to be a great thread!

I see we have the Chief of the Moral Police here, and a PhD in Nutrition. I promise to be back and get back to each and every one of your guys points.

If you don't like my opinion, tell me yourself. Quit the passive aggressive, over exageratted sarcasm, it makes you look sad.

I will post what i want in a public forum and if you don't like it, no one cares. Grow up.

Rosebud
06-12-2011, 05:19 PM
I seriously don't get why people care. I watch football to see clever coaches get absolute freaks of humanity to over power and outwit 11 other freaks. I'm not going to play in the NFL either way, I'm 6' 210-225 and run a 4.9, even if the guys in the NFL didn't juice I wouldn't make it so what do i care if they're even more unbelievably more athletic than me. Hell I don't care even in sports where I could've competed at a top level, badminton and skiing, since I'm not a world class athlete, that's not my goal and I follow the sports I follow to be entertained, and yes it is more impressive to see a guy who's 25 pounds bigger and just as athletic than it is to watch the smaller guy if all else is equal, so why the **** not?

SativaDominant
06-12-2011, 08:07 PM
I won't even try to guess a % but there's no name that could be tied to PEDs that would surprise me. My guess is the only guys that are definitely not using are kickers, but even some of them could be.

I think you'd be surprised. Look at a guy like Billy Cundiff. Never had a season with more than 3 touchbacks. This past year, he set the record with 40.

niel89
06-13-2011, 02:39 AM
I think you'd be surprised. Look at a guy like Billy Cundiff. Never had a season with more than 3 touchbacks. This past year, he set the record with 40.

I was thinking the same thing. He goes from bouncing around to being a really solid kicker. You don't suddenly become a touchback machine out of no where.

FUNBUNCHER
06-13-2011, 07:07 AM
I seriously don't get why people care. I watch football to see clever coaches get absolute freaks of humanity to over power and outwit 11 other freaks. I'm not going to play in the NFL either way, I'm 6' 210-225 and run a 4.9, even if the guys in the NFL didn't juice I wouldn't make it so what do i care if they're even more unbelievably more athletic than me. Hell I don't care even in sports where I could've competed at a top level, badminton and skiing, since I'm not a world class athlete, that's not my goal and I follow the sports I follow to be entertained, and yes it is more impressive to see a guy who's 25 pounds bigger and just as athletic than it is to watch the smaller guy if all else is equal, so why the **** not?

I like pro football and sports in general precisely because they aren't professional wrestling; scripted televsion events with predictable outcomes.

When you tolerate the rampant use of PEDs in the NFL, the 'game' becomes pure entertainment and less of a sport.

FlyingElvis
06-13-2011, 09:35 AM
lol @ Billy Cundiff. I knew you bastards would find some damn example of a K using. 6 years w/6 teams and now he's a stud. You're right . . .


PED use isn't going away. It would be nice if everyone was clean and nobody (players / coaches / etc.) did anything illegal / immoral / or otherwise sketchy to gain a competitive advantage. But this isn't just a sport, this is a billion dollar industry that makes a large number of people rich. Find me a billion dollar industry anywhere in the world that isn't crawling with unethical practices.

Eliminating PED use is about as realstic as expecting politicians to do anything worthwhile, gas prices to drop the same day the per barrel rate does, and peace in the middle east.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 09:49 AM
lol @ Billy Cundiff. I knew you bastards would find some damn example of a K using. 6 years w/6 teams and now he's a stud. You're right . . .


PED use isn't going away. It would be nice if everyone was clean and nobody (players / coaches / etc.) did anything illegal / immoral / or otherwise sketchy to gain a competitive advantage. But this isn't just a sport, this is a billion dollar industry that makes a large number of people rich. Find me a billion dollar industry anywhere in the world that isn't crawling with unethical practices.

Eliminating PED use is about as realstic as expecting politicians to do anything worthwhile, gas prices to drop the same day the per barrel rate does, and peace in the middle east.

Tell me this, why is it that every other sport in the world attempts to stamp out PED use (other than cycling and that is a joke of a sport because everyone knows about the PED use). Soccer, baseball, rugby EVERY Olympic sport. For some reason people seem to think that football should not be held accountable? Why? All PED use does is shorten players lives, ruin their bodies, cause more injuries and make the whole sport illegitimate. We watch sport for athletic competition. We watch it to be inspired and to suspend the reality of our own lives. I think i could live with 280 lb DT's, 235 lb linebackers and everyone being .1 of a second slower over the 40. The game would not suffer at all and it would show the true freaks in the game even more than now.

People who make excuses and say that's the way it is have lost all meaning in what constitutes sport and what is entertainment. If you want to watch steroid munching Neanderthals hit each other, watch pro wrestling.

FlyingElvis
06-13-2011, 10:07 AM
You just listed a bunch of sports that I don't believe for a second have stamped out the use of PEDs. Cycling seems like they dedicate the most resources of all sports and still can't stop it. The issue is not whether or not I want PEDs in my sports, it's whether I have any reasonable expectation that they can effectively be removed from my sports.

People who make excuses and say that's the way it is have lost all meaning in what constitutes sport and what is entertainment. If you want to watch steroid munching Neanderthals hit each other, watch pro wrestling.

Who the **** are you to mandate that others, because their opinion of the issue is different, have "lost all meaning in what constitutes sport and what is entertainment," anyway?

jack1077
06-13-2011, 10:23 AM
You just listed a bunch of sports that I don't believe for a second have stamped out the use of PEDs. Cycling seems like they dedicate the most resources of all sports and still can't stop it. The issue is not whether or not I want PEDs in my sports, it's whether I have any reasonable expectation that they can effectively be removed from my sports.

Soccer makes more money than the nfl. The usage in that sport is exponentially smaller than the nfl. Steroids have not taken any money away from the game what so ever. When people break the PED ban in the Olympic's competition they are actually given 2 to 3 year bans. Yes, other sports do try and succeed at a much higher level to stop PED use.

Who the **** are you to mandate that others, because their opinion of the issue is different, have "lost all meaning in what constitutes sport and what is entertainment," anyway?

Ridiculous argument. It's a public forum. I will write whatever i like and if i disagree with you, i disagree. Tell me i'm wrong, i don't care. Oh and if you think steroids make sport more honest and more exciting, good for you. Enjoy watching more injuries, shorter lifespans and *'s next to every record that is set.

FlyingElvis
06-13-2011, 10:46 AM
Ridiculous argument. It's a public forum. I will write whatever i like and if i disagree with you, i disagree. Tell me i'm wrong, i don't care. Oh and if you think steroids make sport more honest and more exciting, good for you. Enjoy watching more injuries, shorter lifespans and *'s next to every record that is set.


I have not even come close to stating that I think anything of the sort. You clearly have trouble with reading comprehension and I am starting to believe you even have trouble with simple logic. The use of "it's a public forum" is a weak crutch, and one that simply skirts the issue of your judgement of others with differing opinions.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 11:10 AM
I have not even come close to stating that I think anything of the sort. You clearly have trouble with reading comprehension and I am starting to believe you even have trouble with simple logic. The use of "it's a public forum" is a weak crutch, and one that simply skirts the issue of your judgement of others with differing opinions.

So let me get this straight, you are judging my opinion on your opinion and telling me to keep my views to myself? Seems a little bit hypocritical. But what would i know, i am clearly not as intelligent as you. What with your extremely high reading comprehension level and Einstein like logic.

I think i have read your "you lack reading comprehension" in about 2 different threads now. Seems like a weak crutch to me for someone who can't articulate any other points. It is also a crutch that criticises the person, not the opinion, which is actually the idea of posting on forums.

My opinion was that steroids go against the principles of sport and athletic competition. You seem to think that steroid use is unstoppable and we should just give up. I gave you examples of how other sports do in fact significantly reduce usage by testing extensively and punishing more effectively. Seem accurate?

Let me say this. Get the **** off your high horse by criticising my intelligence. You do not know me from a bar of soap and i don't know you. i respect your opinion, but that does not mean i cannot criticise it. I do not imply that you are beneath me in anyway.

SativaDominant
06-13-2011, 11:24 AM
Ridiculous argument. It's a public forum. I will write whatever i like and if i disagree with you, i disagree. Tell me i'm wrong, i don't care. Oh and if you think steroids make sport more honest and more exciting, good for you. Enjoy watching more injuries, shorter lifespans and *'s next to every record that is set.

Hello there, strawman.

Also, I suggest you check this out. PEDs in professional sports certainly aren't exclusive to this generation.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/magazine/03/11/steroid.timeline/index.html

jack1077
06-13-2011, 11:38 AM
Hello there, strawman.

Also, I suggest you check this out. PEDs in professional sports certainly aren't exclusive to this generation.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/magazine/03/11/steroid.timeline/index.html

PED use isn't going away. It would be nice if everyone was clean and nobody (players / coaches / etc.) did anything illegal / immoral / or otherwise sketchy to gain a competitive advantage. But this isn't just a sport, this is a billion dollar industry that makes a large number of people rich. Find me a billion dollar industry anywhere in the world that isn't crawling with unethical practices.

Seems to me that the intention of this statement is, "yeah steroids are bad, but what can we do? We are powerless. Just accept it." My point is, people who think that are ruining the game as much as the people who openly defend steroid use. They say nothing will change and of course, nothing ever does. forgive me if this isn't a with me or against me moment.

FlyingElvis
06-13-2011, 11:41 AM
So let me get this straight, you are judging my opinion on your opinion and telling me to keep my views to myself? Seems a little bit hypocritical. But what would i know, i am clearly not as intelligent as you. What with your extremely high reading comprehension level and Einstein like logic.

Wrong. I never told you to keep your views to yourself. I asked who you are to judge. There's a vast difference.

I think i have read your "you lack reading comprehension" in about 2 different threads now. Seems like a weak crutch to me for someone who can't articulate any other points. It is also a crutch that criticises the person, not the opinion, which is actually the idea of posting on forums.

It does criticize the person. In this case, you, since you continue to completely miss my points and then attribute things to me that I never said.

My opinion was that steroids go against the principles of sport and athletic competition. You seem to think that steroid use is unstoppable and we should just give up. I gave you examples of how other sports do in fact significantly reduce usage by testing extensively and punishing more effectively. Seem accurate?

Again, not at all what I said. I never used the words give up, unstoppable, or anything along those lines.

Let me say this. Get the **** off your high horse by criticising my intelligence. You do not know me from a bar of soap and i don't know you. i respect your opinion, but that does not mean i cannot criticise it. I do not imply that you are beneath me in anyway.

No, you clearly don't respect my opinion. You don't even take the time to understand my opinion. I'll get off my high horse when you actually bother to have an honest conversation without attributing whatever the hell you want to anyone you want and then proceed to judge them based on those inaccuracies.

It's ok for you to post whatever you want on a public forum, but when I call you out for judging based on a general lack of understanding, you cry foul. So I can't use that same public forum, then? In addition to that, you can say others "have lost all meaning in what constitutes sport and what is entertainment," which is clearly an indictment of the person, not the idea.

It's funny you chose to use the word hypocracy.

FUNBUNCHER
06-13-2011, 11:52 AM
Hello there, strawman.

Also, I suggest you check this out. PEDs in professional sports certainly aren't exclusive to this generation.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/magazine/03/11/steroid.timeline/index.html


THere wasn't a readily available/accessible black market for steroids until the late 1970s. IMO there were sporadic users throughout the early 1980s, probably a handful or less of guys per team, and that number has steadily increased throughout the years.

IMO the NFL doesn't need steroids to be the #1 sport in America.

EDIT: FlyingElvis, if the Word Anti-Doping Agency is allowed to administer the NFL's drug testing policy, which consists of random blood and urine testing 365 days/year, including the offseason, you'll see PED use in the NFL drop to an estimated 5-10%.

It would be similar to the PED usage of Olympic caliber track and field athletes; yes some people would still manage to beat the test, but it would become so much more difficult that most NFL players would decide the risk of getting caught wasn't worth the risk.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 12:05 PM
You just listed a bunch of sports that I don't believe for a second have stamped out the use of PEDs. Cycling seems like they dedicate the most resources of all sports and still can't stop it. The issue is not whether or not I want PEDs in my sports, it's whether I have any reasonable expectation that they can effectively be removed from my sports.



Who the **** are you to mandate that others, because their opinion of the issue is different, have "lost all meaning in what constitutes sport and what is entertainment," anyway?


You sir get it!!!!!

Everyone should be giving you positive points for this!!

jack1077
06-13-2011, 12:06 PM
Wrong. I never told you to keep your views to yourself. I asked who you are to judge. There's a vast difference.



It does criticize the person. In this case, you, since you continue to completely miss my points and then attribute things to me that I never said.



Again, not at all what I said. I never used the words give up, unstoppable, or anything along those lines.



No, you clearly don't respect my opinion. You don't even take the time to understand my opinion. I'll get off my high horse when you actually bother to have an honest conversation without attributing whatever the hell you want to anyone you want and then proceed to judge them based on those inaccuracies.

It's ok for you to post whatever you want on a public forum, but when I call you out for judging based on a general lack of understanding, you cry foul. So I can't use that same public forum, then? In addition to that, you can say others "have lost all meaning in what constitutes sport and what is entertainment," which is clearly an indictment of the person, not the idea.

It's funny you chose to use the word hypocracy.

How does thinking your opinion is wrong an attack on you? I think you are wrong. I don't think you are a bad person. So what is your point exactly? Explain it to me. IMO, your point is 'people use steroids, thats bad, but no one will ever stop it, there is too much money involved'. Is that accurate? Well, IMO when you say this, you are the problem, as much as the people who defend steroid use by saying that it levels competition. Who am i to judge? Someone who is putting their opinion on a forum. Have a problem with it? Explain to me why you are not the problem.

I also went on to give you examples of sports where more money is involved and the steroid testing is more effective. Where the testing discourages steroid useage. I think your opinion is a lazy one. I think your opinion gives up on the principles of sport and athletic competition. is that a personal attack? No, its an attack on your opinion. completely different. I still respect your opinion, i just disagree with it. Who am i to judge? The same person as you. You have the right to attack my opinion all you like. If you think i miss represent you, say that. Don't insult my intelligence.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 12:08 PM
I think this dude has won the 'biggest dick' award on these forums in his last 2 weeks on here.

How so? Just because I don't agree with the Moral Police and the Expert Nutritionist?

BTW: I never attach names to posts, I debate/agree with the actual content and not the name of the user.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 12:16 PM
I think virtually everything funbuncher said is accurate. I'd just be repeating his words for i share his opinions but i will expand on oa few things.

It does not take 99.99999999% genetics to play in the nfl. Genetics obviously help but they do not give you the hard work it takes. Every single athlete in the nfl worked their ass off. Genetics will always help but you mentioned coordination. People learn coordination. You can even learn to improve quickness easily.

You say "its hard for me to understand". I have heard your "even playing field" argument before. Here is mine, if everyone is on roids, then its an even playing field, if everyone isn't, then it is also an even playing field. Basically what you are advocating is these players taking as many PED's as their bodies can handle just to be able to COMPETE. Why? Would the product be diminished if no one was on roids? No.

Oh and i could actually be big enough to play in the NFL. I would of course never be fast enough to be a corner at my current size but if i kept adding to my frame i would be a linebacker, similar size to London Fletcher. I would however lack the years of TRAINING it takes to succeed.


What the heck are you saying? That it does not take good genes to be a Pro Athlete? and That hard work is all you need?

Some scientist believe that genetics plays a bigger role in coordination than training. Are you saying these guys are wrong?

jack1077
06-13-2011, 12:17 PM
How so? Just because I don't agree with the Moral Police and the Expert Nutritionist?

BTW: I never attach names to posts, I debate/agree with the actual content and not the name of the user.

Yes, advocating for stricter steroid testing makes me the morale police. I guess all the sports bodies around the world except the NFL are too be mocked for trying to have PED's taken out of the game.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 12:25 PM
What the heck are you saying? That it does not take good genes to be a Pro Athlete? and That hard work is all you need?

Some scientist believe that genetics plays a bigger role in coordination than training. Are you saying these guys are wrong?

Some scientists say that, some don't, does that make them wrong?

Of course it takes good genes, but it't not like 99.9999999% of the male population could never play pro football. I would hardly say Wes Welker or Danny Woodhead are the greatest athletes in the world, but they are good enough. Which is your point on nfl WR's in the other thread. You don'y have to be able to bench a truck, run like usain bolt and jump like Sotomayor. You just have to be strong enough, run fast enough (think Jerry Rice) and jump high enough (think Wes Welker).

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 12:35 PM
Some scientists say that, some don't, does that make them wrong?

Of course it takes good genes, but it't not like 99.9999999% of the male population could never play pro football. I would hardly say Wes Welker or Danny Woodhead are the greatest athletes in the world, but they are good enough. Which is your point on nfl WR's in the other thread. You don'y have to be able to bench a truck, run like usain bolt and jump like Sotomayor. You just have to be strong enough, run fast enough (think Jerry Rice) and jump high enough (think Wes Welker).


I might have exaggerated some 9's. Regardless, it's a small number. 99.999999 might be an exaggeration but 99.999% is not an exaggeration.

I can go over the numbers if you like? In one of the Rivals article it mentioned that in a town with a population of 100,000, there will only be one athlete each year to get a Division1 College Football Scholarship. Keep in mind this is just a "college football scholarship" and not an NFL contract. In 10 years, you are looking at 10 players from this town. 10/100,000, well that there is 99.999%

I am going to disagree with you when you say "Danny Woodhead and Wes Welker are not the greatest athletes in the world". To me they are, that is why they are in the NFL. They have enough tools to succeed and make it, and they do, that is why they are with the best in the world.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 12:43 PM
Yes, advocating for stricter steroid testing makes me the morale police. I guess all the sports bodies around the world except the NFL are too be mocked for trying to have PED's taken out of the game.

So PED's are OK as long as it's not Steroids?

You said you wanted stricter Steroid testing. What do you want to do? How would you implement this?

What about steroids to recover from a career-ending-type injury? Would this be OK?

jack1077
06-13-2011, 12:53 PM
I might have exaggerated some 9's. Regardless, it's a small number. 99.999999 might be an exaggeration but 99.999% is not an exaggeration.

I can go over the numbers if you like? In one of the Rivals article it mentioned that in a town with a population of 100,000, there will only be one athlete each year to get a Division1 College Football Scholarship. Keep in mind this is just a "college football scholarship" and not an NFL contract. In 10 years, you are looking at 10 players from this town. 10/100,000, well that there is 99.999%

I am going to disagree with you when you say "Danny Woodhead and Wes Welker are not the greatest athletes in the world". To me they are, that is why they are in the NFL. They have enough tools to succeed and make it, and they do, that is why they are with the best in the world.

Firsty, in your example you assume that only D1 football players ever make it in the NFL. Secondly, you assume that all athletes want to play football and not other sports. Thirdly, you assume that all people in the 100 000 are trying to get D1 football scholarships or trying to play in the NFL, people have other interests. Also, your example does not take into account demographic, injuries etc.

As i have pointed out, using your own examples:

You do not have to be a freak of athletics, just good enough to get by. Does it help being Julius Peppers? Of ******* course it does. Does that mean that all DE's are 6-6 275lbs and run 4.6 - 4.7 fortys? Of course not. London Fletcher is not a freak. Nor is Dexter Coakley. Nor is Danny Woodhead, Wes Welker, Jim Leonard etc. There are players that play other sports that would be NFL players had they been given football as the only choice. I completely disagree with you that every player on the field has to be a freak. Do you have to have good genes, yes. You basically can't have a birth defect. After that, sport is full of success stories about undersized players being champions in every sport, not just the NFL.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 01:00 PM
So PED's are OK as long as it's not Steroids?

You said you wanted stricter Steroid testing. What do you want to do? How would you implement this?

What about steroids to recover from a career-ending-type injury? Would this be OK?

Hello someone who love semantics.

if the Word Anti-Doping Agency is allowed to administer the NFL's drug testing policy, which consists of random blood and urine testing 365 days/year, including the offseason, you'll see PED use in the NFL drop to an estimated 5-10%.

It would be similar to the PED usage of Olympic caliber track and field athletes; yes some people would still manage to beat the test, but it would become so much more difficult that most NFL players would decide the risk of getting caught wasn't worth the risk. - Funbuncher

Sorry to quote someone else but he put it better than i could.

Oh and, is the person never going to play again? If so, they can do whatever they like, they are not achieving an unfair advantage so if they want to take steroids so they can walk again, i can't stop them. The difference is, i don't care what people put into their bodies if they are not in a business in which their bodies performance is competing against others peoples to make money.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 01:17 PM
Firsty, in your example you assume that only D1 football players ever make it in the NFL. Secondly, you assume that all athletes want to play football and not other sports. Thirdly, you assume that all people in the 100 000 are trying to get D1 football scholarships or trying to play in the NFL, people have other interests. Also, your example does not take into account demographic, injuries etc.

As i have pointed out, using your own examples:

You do not have to be a freak of athletics, just good enough to get by. Does it help being Julius Peppers? Of ******* course it does. Does that mean that all DE's are 6-6 275lbs and run 4.6 - 4.7 fortys? Of course not. London Fletcher is not a freak. Nor is Dexter Coakley. Nor is Danny Woodhead, Wes Welker, Jim Leonard etc. There are players that play other sports that would be NFL players had they been given football as the only choice. I completely disagree with you that every player on the field has to be a freak. Do you have to have good genes, yes. You basically can't have a birth defect. After that, sport is full of success stories about undersized players being champions in every sport, not just the NFL.


I can use whatever number you want.

Today there are about 20,000 NFL and Former-NFL players. Let's just use a number 10 times that, about 200,000... and say 200,000 people living today were good enough genetically to play in the NFL, but for whatever reason they did not make it (reasons such as: they did not like football, they had a kid, they did not work hard enough, etc).

So if you take 200,000/310,000,000 = .000067

1 - .000067 = .99993 = 99.993%

Or if this does not work for you, please let me know of the numbers you want to use. I am here for you my friend and buddy.

FUNBUNCHER
06-13-2011, 01:21 PM
You sir get it!!!!!

Everyone should be giving you positive points for this!!

What if I told you that college admissions officers believe nationwide that 20-25% of all applicants have used illegal means to obtain their SAT scores??

Would you then argue, 'So what? That's life?', or should colleges do more to verify the authenticity of scores students are submitting with their applications??

It's a slippery slope IMO when you condone blatant cheating. The sub-prime mortgage crisis and the subsequent near collapse of the global economy can be boiled down to groupthink ethos in the financial industry that cheating is 'okay', until you get caught.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 01:30 PM
Hello someone who love semantics.

if the Word Anti-Doping Agency is allowed to administer the NFL's drug testing policy, which consists of random blood and urine testing 365 days/year, including the offseason, you'll see PED use in the NFL drop to an estimated 5-10%.

It would be similar to the PED usage of Olympic caliber track and field athletes; yes some people would still manage to beat the test, but it would become so much more difficult that most NFL players would decide the risk of getting caught wasn't worth the risk. - Funbuncher

Sorry to quote someone else but he put it better than i could.

Oh and, is the person never going to play again? If so, they can do whatever they like, they are not achieving an unfair advantage so if they want to take steroids so they can walk again, i can't stop them. The difference is, i don't care what people put into their bodies if they are not in a business in which their bodies performance is competing against others peoples to make money.


What are semantics? I don't even know what that is, that seems to be your area of expertise.

I see you like to compare gardening (aka Olympics) to the NFL. One of them does not make money, while the other makes millions.

So you want the NFL, to spend a good deal of it's profits on drug testing? What if a test does come up positive? You don't think the players will fight it? Fight the testing procedure, or maybe fight the policy for not being clear enough, etc. So now not only does the NFL have to waste millions in testing, they now have to waste millions in law fees.

You seem to have this well thought out, being the good Moral Policeman that you are I did not expect anything less hahhahahahah.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 01:35 PM
I can use whatever number you want.

Today there are about 20,000 NFL and Former-NFL players. Let's just use a number 10 times that, about 200,000... and say 200,000 people living today were good enough genetically to play in the NFL, but for whatever reason they did not make it (reasons such as: they did not like football, they had a kid, they did not work hard enough, etc).

So if you take 200,000/310,000,000 = .000067

1 - .000067 = .99993 = 99.993%

Or if this does not work for you, please let me know of the numbers you want to use. I am here for you my friend and buddy.

And how many wanted to play football? How many are women? You assume that people who do not play in the nfl actually wanted to but failed. There are a lot of athletes in the world and a lot of athletic people who chose a different path.

Tell me how many people want to play in the NFL vs those who don't. Use that number. Tell me how many people have the the genes vs those who don't. You can't prove anything with those numbers because they assume so much and so do you. Next.

I like how you skate over my points clearly pointing out players that are not the 'freaks' of genetics.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 01:37 PM
What if I told you that college admissions officers believe nationwide that 20-25% of all applicants have used illegal means to obtain their SAT scores??

Would you then argue, 'So what? That's life?', or should colleges do more to verify the authenticity of scores students are submitting with their applications??

It's a slippery slope IMO when you condone blatant cheating. The sub-prime mortgage crisis and the subsequent near collapse of the global economy can be boiled down to groupthink ethos in the financial industry that cheating is 'okay', until you get caught.


What if I told you that the reason Jupiter is so big is because it unfairly sucks some of the gasses from Saturn. Would you be OK with this? I mean gas is gas and it should be earned and not stolen.

There is a level above cheating. It's called "Laws".

Also what do you know about the sub-prime mortgage crises? I am happy to discuss that with you too. Do you know what created sub-prime mortgages?

FUNBUNCHER
06-13-2011, 01:37 PM
BTW, I'd argue that Coakley and London Fletcher are freaks. I believe Coakley at one time ran a high 4.3 and Fletcher ran a 4.4 predraft. They were just less than ideal height for the position, but they aren't the only sub-six foot LBs to enjoy NFL success,(Sam Mills and Zach Thomas, etc.)

There are so many variables that go into being a great football player, we don't need to make PEDs another requirement.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 01:47 PM
And how many wanted to play football? How many are women? You assume that people who do not play in the nfl actually wanted to but failed. There are a lot of athletes in the world and a lot of athletic people who chose a different path.

Tell me how many people want to play in the NFL vs those who don't. Use that number. Tell me how many people have the the genes vs those who don't. You can't prove anything with those numbers because they assume so much and so do you. Next.

I like how you skate over my points clearly pointing out players that are not the 'freaks' of genetics.


Women are people too. Or did they make a law to say they are not?

I told you I will use whatever numbers you want. So how about you use some numbers? In my example above, I already way way inflated the numbers in your favor to help your cause.. but it's still a losing cause!

I am trying to help you my friend and buddy but it seems you do not want to help yourself.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 01:49 PM
BTW, I'd argue that Coakley and London Fletcher are freaks. I believe Coakley at one time ran a high 4.3 and Fletcher ran a 4.4 predraft. They were just less than ideal height for the position, but they aren't the only sub-six foot LBs to enjoy NFL success,(Sam Mills and Zach Thomas, etc.)

There are so many variables that go into being a great football player, we don't need to make PEDs another requirement.

I agree with you, Coakly and Fletcher's are great athletes. You don't get to the NFL by not being among the best athletes in the world.

FUNBUNCHER
06-13-2011, 01:51 PM
What are semantics? I don't even know what that is, that seems to be your area of expertise.

I see you like to compare gardening (aka Olympics) to the NFL. One of them does not make money, while the other makes millions.

So you want the NFL, to spend a good deal of it's profits on drug testing? What if a test does come up positive? You don't think the players will fight it? Fight the testing procedure, or maybe fight the policy for not being clear enough, etc. So now not only does the NFL have to waste millions in testing, they now have to waste millions in law fees.

You seem to have this well thought out, being the good Moral Policeman that you are I did not expect anything less hahhahahahah.



You really think the NFL can't afford to implement Olympic level testing??

The argument that any new testing procedure is 'too expensive' is a BS rationale.

Testing IMO works more as a deterrent than zeroing out the use of PEDs in a given sport.

If WADA had busted Cushing, he would have kept his mouth closed because they would have detailed exactly why his numbers came up dirty.

How many players are going to fight a drug suspension they're likely to lose anyway??

Remember, track and field cheats had to rely on BALCO labs and a chemist who'd recently invented an unknown and undetectable PED, which eventually was found out.

Basically, if any athlete exceeds their baseline acceptable numbers for specific hormonal and blood serum levels, they are going to get pinched by WADA, and rarely does WADA ever produce a 'false positive', or lose an arbitration hearing or a court case.

It's not a question about morality, it's about whether you want to classify the NFL as a sport that provides entertainment, or entertainment that pretends to be a sport.

I bet you that Las Vegas hates the idea of PEDs in the pro sports because it skews the betting lines in ways they can't control or anticipate.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 01:51 PM
What are semantics? I don't even know what that is, that seems to be your area of expertise.

I see you like to compare gardening (aka Olympics) to the NFL. One of them does not make money, while the other makes millions.

So you want the NFL, to spend a good deal of it's profits on drug testing? What if a test does come up positive? You don't think the players will fight it? Fight the testing procedure, or maybe fight the policy for not being clear enough, etc. So now not only does the NFL have to waste millions in testing, they now have to waste millions in law fees.

You seem to have this well thought out, being the good Moral Policeman that you are I did not expect anything less hahhahahahah.

Semantics in this context means that you made a petty point about PED's and steroids knowing that i used one to mean the other.

Hahahahahaha the stupidest thing i've heard yet from you. Yeah, the NFL is really struggling financially. What with the 4 billion in profit they make every year. 40 million or so in testing would really break the bank, and that is being generous.

And no, they wouldn't be able to fight it if it was included in the CBA that they could not challenge the ruling of the NFL regarding their eligibility, especially with the most trusted PED testing organisation in the world. Something tells me the cost will never be an issue for the NFL.

Thank you for complimenting my points.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 01:53 PM
You really think the NFL can't afford to implement Olympic level testing??

The argument that any new testing procedure is 'too expensive' is a BS rationale.

Testing IMO works more as a deterrent than zeroing out the use of PEDs in a given sport.

If WADA had busted Cushing, he would have kept his mouth closed because they would have detailed exactly why his numbers came up dirty.

How many players are going to fight a drug suspension they're likely to lose anyway??

Remember, track and field cheats had to rely on BALCO labs and a chemist who'd recently invented an unknown and undetectable PED, which eventually was found out.

Basically, if any athlete exceeds their baseline acceptable numbers for specific hormonal and blood serum levels, they are going to get pinched by WADA, and rarely does WADA ever produce a 'false positive', or lose an arbitration hearing or a court case.

It's not a question about morality, it's about whether you want to classify the NFL as a sport that provides entertainment, or entertainment that pretends to be a sport.

I bet you that Las Vegas hates the idea of PEDs in the pro sports because it skews the betting lines in ways they can't control or anticipate.

Just made that exact point hahaha!

jack1077
06-13-2011, 01:56 PM
Women are people too. Or did they make a law to say they are not?

I told you I will use whatever numbers you want. So how about you use some numbers? In my example above, I already way way inflated the numbers in your favor to help your cause.. but it's still a losing cause!

I am trying to help you my friend and buddy but it seems you do not want to help yourself.

Women don't play in the NFL?

I help myself everytime you post something, because you just dig yourself deeper. THE COST OF DRUG TESTING! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

jack1077
06-13-2011, 02:00 PM
What if I told you that the reason Jupiter is so big is because it unfairly sucks some of the gasses from Saturn. Would you be OK with this? I mean gas is gas and it should be earned and not stolen.

There is a level above cheating. It's called "Laws".

Also what do you know about the sub-prime mortgage crises? I am happy to discuss that with you too. Do you know what created sub-prime mortgages?

Good point. Jupiter and Brian Cushing do have a lot in common.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 02:12 PM
You really think the NFL can't afford to implement Olympic level testing??

The argument that any new testing procedure is 'too expensive' is a BS rationale.

Testing IMO works more as a deterrent than zeroing out the use of PEDs in a given sport.

If WADA had busted Cushing, he would have kept his mouth closed because they would have detailed exactly why his numbers came up dirty.

How many players are going to fight a drug suspension they're likely to lose anyway??

Remember, track and field cheats had to rely on BALCO labs and a chemist who'd recently invented an unknown and undetectable PED, which eventually was found out.

Basically, if any athlete exceeds their baseline acceptable numbers for specific hormonal and blood serum levels, they are going to get pinched by WADA, and rarely does WADA ever produce a 'false positive', or lose an arbitration hearing or a court case.

It's not a question about morality, it's about whether you want to classify the NFL as a sport that provides entertainment, or entertainment that pretends to be a sport.

I bet you that Las Vegas hates the idea of PEDs in the pro sports because it skews the betting lines in ways they can't control or anticipate.


It's good that we have people like you telling the NFL how to spend their money. If the NFL is no longer a "sport", and you do not like this, can't you just turn off the TV?

I don't think the Olympic and Cycling PED scandals are over. Athletes will find ways to get around the new schedules, and invent new PEDs, and invent new drugs to cover up the PEDs.

When the stakes are this high, there will and always be cheaters. So yeah.. go ahead and implement the FunBuncher Plan. It will calm things down for 5 years, which is better than nothing right?

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 02:14 PM
Semantics in this context means that you made a petty point about PED's and steroids knowing that i used one to mean the other.

Hahahahahaha the stupidest thing i've heard yet from you. Yeah, the NFL is really struggling financially. What with the 4 billion in profit they make every year. 40 million or so in testing would really break the bank, and that is being generous.

And no, they wouldn't be able to fight it if it was included in the CBA that they could not challenge the ruling of the NFL regarding their eligibility, especially with the most trusted PED testing organisation in the world. Something tells me the cost will never be an issue for the NFL.

Thank you for complimenting my points.


Like I said Moral Police, like to tell the NFL how they should spend their money. And tell all of us what is morally right in your eyes and we must follow this plan.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 02:15 PM
Good point. Jupiter and Brian Cushing do have a lot in common.

about as much in common as any other make believe entity that one uses to make a point.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 02:15 PM
It's good that we have people like you telling the NFL how to spend their money. If the NFL is no longer a "sport", and you do not like this, can't you just turn off the TV?

I don't think the Olympic and Cycling PED scandals are over. Athletes will find ways to get around the new schedules, and invent new PEDs, and invent new drugs to cover up the PEDs.

When the stakes are this high, there will and always be cheaters. So yeah.. go ahead and implement the FunBuncher Plan. It will calm things down for 5 years, which is better than nothing right?

Dude, you are losing your grip on this argument all together. You just said that because people cheat we should not try and stop them. What funbuncher meant with the sub prime thing is exactly this. They let them cheat, look what happened. buddy...

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 02:17 PM
Women don't play in the NFL?

I help myself everytime you post something, because you just dig yourself deeper. THE COST OF DRUG TESTING! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Being a man is part of having the genetics to play in the NFL, or am I wrong here?

All I said was only 99.999% of us do not have the genetics to play in the NFL no matter how much steroids we take. I was including women as "us". but if you want me to take them out of the equation I can.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 02:18 PM
Like I said Moral Police, like to tell the NFL how they should spend their money. And tell all of us what is morally right in your eyes and we must follow this plan.

Buddy, i think you just lost the argument. You understand that the NFL already spends money on drug testing, it is just ineffective.

I think the majority of people agree with me actually. Look at the outrage surrounding olympic athletes who cheat. In most other sports, when you are caught doping, it is a 'lifetime' (usually 2-3 year) ban. Not 4 games and you are still eligible for awards.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 02:20 PM
Being a man is part of having the genetics to play in the NFL, or am I wrong here?

All I said was only 99.999% of us do not have the genetics to play in the NFL no matter how much steroids we take. I was including women as "us". but if you want me to take them out of the equation I can.

You used an example of 100 000 people, i am led to believe that 50 000 of them are women aernt i?

jack1077
06-13-2011, 02:22 PM
about as much in common as any other make believe entity that one uses to make a point.

But your metaphor didn't even make sense because it implied that either both planets were steroids or both were humans???? If both are steroids then steroids steal steroids and if both are human the brian cushing is literally eating or stealing part of the other person to make him stronger????

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 02:23 PM
Dude, you are losing your grip on this argument all together. You just said that because people cheat we should not try and stop them. What funbuncher meant with the sub prime thing is exactly this. They let them cheat, look what happened. buddy...

I did not realize I was arguing, thought I was only discussing things.

I don't understand enough about PEDs to know what is cheating and what is not. Like I said, 99.99% of us will not be good enough to play in the NFL no matter how much PEDs we take.

Unlike all you experts, this is an area I don't want to try to enforece because I am not a "Moral Police Officer" like you.

How did they cheat in the subprime thing? What did they do? Stupid people like me are here to learn from experts like yourself.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 02:26 PM
But your metaphor didn't even make sense because it implied that either both planets were steroids or both were humans???? If both are steroids then steroids steal steroids and if both are human the brian cushing is literally eating or stealing part of the other person to make him stronger????

It was not suppose to make sense, because the original phrase was also make believe. Jupiter does not suck gas from Saturn.

You guys were introducing make believe scenarios into the equation to make a point, so I thought I would do the same since you are so AWESOME and I am here to follow your lead.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 02:27 PM
This thread is so awesome. I think we can go to 100 pages easily.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 02:29 PM
I did not realize I was arguing, thought I was only discussing things.

I don't understand enough about PEDs to know what is cheating and what is not. Like I said, 99.99% of us will not be good enough to play in the NFL no matter how much PEDs we take.

Unlike all you experts, I this is an area I don't want to try to enforece because I am not a "Moral Police Officer" like you.l

How did they cheat in the subprime thing? What did they do? Stupid people like me are here to learn from experts like yourself.

Buddy, i'm not an expert, but i am an educated fan. I think we all are aren't we? That's why we are on a football forum.

You assume that number and haven't proved it too me once. Of course most people wouldn't be able to play in the nfl, but that does not mean 99.9999%. As i have shown, the numbers you bring up are invalid. You assume so much in them. Even in the town of 100 000 people, how many will be in senior high and eligible to get a scholarship? Just a stupid and invalid point, that does not take expertise to figure out, just common sense.

If you don't know anything about it, why are you voicing an opinion on the topic?

Ask funbuncher about the sub prime thing, i feel he knows more than me.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 02:30 PM
This thread is so awesome. I think we can go to 100 pages easily.

Mate, if this goes to 100 pages my head will explode from your stupidity. And yes, that was a personal attack.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 02:31 PM
It was not suppose to make sense, because the original phrase was also make believe. Jupiter does not suck gas from Saturn.

You guys were introducing make believe scenarios into the equation to make a point, so I thought I would do the same since you are so AWESOME and I am here to follow your lead.

I'm just gonna leave that as it is for future generations to stumble upon.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 02:33 PM
Even in the town of 100 000 people, how many will be in senior high and eligible to get a scholarship? Just a stupid and invalid point, that does not take expertise to figure out, just common sense.


That's why I did not use 1. I used 10. Saying that at any one time there were 10 people from that town that went on to play Division1 Football with Scholarship. What number do you want me to use, 20? 50? Because I seriously doubt there were 50. Not just that but the town will not have not always been 100,000. So I thought 10 was a good approx to use. Should I have used 20?

Either way the numbers will be small.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 02:34 PM
Mate, if this goes to 100 pages my head will explode from your stupidity. And yes, that was a personal attack.

but you are helping me to be smart. yes that was a compliment.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 02:36 PM
That's why I did not use 1. I used 10. Saying that at any one time there were 10 people from that town that went on to play Division1 Football with Scholarship. What number do you want me to use, 20? 50? Because I seriously doubt there were 50. Not just that but the town will not have not always been 100,000. So I thought 10 was a good approx to use. Should I have used 20?

Either way the numbers will be small.

But the numbers are invalid, you just made them up. Also, in your very carefully crafted example you didn't account for 50% of people being women. You didn't account for the fact that even if someone had the talent they might choose another sport, another career? You didn't even count the age. What if 70% of the people were 40+ (which is likely i think)? Just a stupid example.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 02:37 PM
If you don't know anything about it, why are you voicing an opinion on the topic?


I can voice an opinion that I don't know enough about PEDs to mandate drug testing, and no matter what mandate I give, you will always have cheaters. So I would rather just keep it the way it is.

I would even go one step further. I think the NFL should educate players on the proper use of PEDs and the side effects of it.

In the end, it's their body, and their livelihood so I myself and not going to tell them how to act.

You on the other hand are a "Moral Police Officer" so it's your job to draw a line and tell them how to act. You seem to know where the line is, because you are an expert in everything.

prock
06-13-2011, 02:41 PM
What does the percentage of people who are good enough athletes to make the NFL have anything to do with this topic? Steroids are cheating. Cheating is wrong. The NFL has the means to step up PED testing and penalties. That will slow down PED usage. I don't get why this is even an argument. Unless you think cheating is acceptable, then you have no argument.

/thread

jack1077
06-13-2011, 02:44 PM
I can voice an opinion that I don't know enough about PEDs to mandate drug testing, and no matter what mandate I give, you will always have cheaters. So I would rather just keep it the way it is.

I would even go one step further. I think the NFL should educate players on the proper use of PEDs and the side effects of it.

In the end, it's their body, and their livelihood so I myself and not going to tell them how to act.

You on the other hand are a "Moral Police Officer" so it's your job to draw a line and tell them how to act. You seem to know where the line is, because you are an expert in everything.

Yes i do constantly claim to be a expert in everything.

BUT WHAT ABOUT THE COST OF EDUCATING THE PLAYERS!! WHO ARE YOU TO TELL THE NFL HOW TO SPEND THEIR MONEY!!

it's their body yes, but their body earns them money by performance. When they take PED's to unfairly improve their performance, i have a problem with it. It also makes their stats invalid because it isn't them competing, it's the drugs.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 02:45 PM
What does the percentage of people who are good enough athletes to make the NFL have anything to do with this topic? Steroids are cheating. Cheating is wrong. The NFL has the means to step up PED testing and penalties. That will slow down PED usage. I don't get why this is even an argument. Unless you think cheating is acceptable, then you have no argument.

/thread

I tried that argument, he didn't buy it. He thinks that 99.99999% of people couldn't play anyway so why do we plebs care. Yes, i think its stupid too.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 02:47 PM
But the numbers are invalid, you just made them up. Also, in your very carefully crafted example you didn't account for 50% of people being women. You didn't account for the fact that even if someone had the talent they might choose another sport, another career? You didn't even count the age. What if 70% of the people were 40+ (which is likely i think)? Just a stupid example.


Do you not see I am trying to help you? Work the numbers in your favor?

There will be no concrete numbers so some fill ins will have to be used. Trying to track concrete numbers for this is impossible because it's very dynamic. A a town's population ages, people move, the town gets smaller or the town gets bigger.

We can use real numbers if you want.
- Right now there are only about 1700 active NFL players. How many retired and inactive would you say? I read somewhere where that number was about 20,000.
- The adult population of this country is about 228 million.
- Half of those are men, so that's 114 million.
- we'll say about 200,000 people (that's 10 times the actual number of former and current NFL players) are/were good enough to play NFL football.
- That works out to be about 99.8% of all current adult males genetically gifted enough to play NFL football.

Do you not see I am trying to help you? Work the numbers in your favor?

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 02:48 PM
Yes i do constantly claim to be a expert in everything.

BUT WHAT ABOUT THE COST OF EDUCATING THE PLAYERS!! WHO ARE YOU TO TELL THE NFL HOW TO SPEND THEIR MONEY!!

it's their body yes, but their body earns them money by performance. When they take PED's to unfairly improve their performance, i have a problem with it. It also makes their stats invalid because it isn't them competing, it's the drugs.


There are have always been cheaters. You don't think people used PEDs in the 70's? or 80's?

FUNBUNCHER
06-13-2011, 02:52 PM
There are have always been cheaters. You don't think people used PEDs in the 70's? or 80's?

It's all about degree. If two students are cheating out of lecture of 300, you deal with it.

But if 100 students are cheating from that same class, the lecture you're teaching has no value anymore.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 02:53 PM
Do you not see I am trying to help you? Work the numbers in your favor?

There will be no concrete numbers so some fill ins will have to be used. Trying to track concrete numbers for this is impossible because it's very dynamic. A a town's population ages, people move, the town gets smaller or the town gets bigger.

We can use real numbers if you want.
- Right now there are only about 1700 active NFL players. How many retired and inactive would you say? I read somewhere where that number was about 20,000.
- The adult population of this country is about 228 million.
- Half of those are men, so that's 114 million.
- we'll say about 200,000 people (that's 10 times the actual number of former and current NFL players).
- That works out to be about 99.8% of all current adult males genetically gifted enough to play NFL football.

Do you not see I am trying to help you? Work the numbers in your favor?

I don't have to put them in my favour, my point is there is no data that supports your argument that does not have huge holes in it. How many sports are there in America, or the world? How many pro athletes are there? How many people could be a pro athlete? Stop using your stupid stat which has no evidence. As the other guy said, its off topic anyway. Steroids are wrong. If you don't think so, you are ****** in the head.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 02:56 PM
It's all about degree. If two students are cheating out of lecture of 300, you deal with it.

But if 100 students are cheating from that same class, the lecture you're teaching has no value anymore.


If everyone is doing it, then would that not make the playing field equal?

bucfan12
06-13-2011, 02:57 PM
Honestly, with the lockout now in session, I wonder how many players used steriods or some sort of PED since March? Theres no testing until the lockout ends, so I bet players (such as Brian Cushing) definately took advantage of that.

Honestly, I believe that some players used them in high school and/or college because there really isn't testing and believe me, it would cost schools a ton of money to test every athlete.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 02:57 PM
Wow I lost 6500 points today because of the Moral Police and Nutrionist! Thanks guys, what would the world do without you guys?

jack1077
06-13-2011, 03:00 PM
There are have always been cheaters. You don't think people used PEDs in the 70's? or 80's?

No response to my point on your "educate the players on PED usage".

Of course they did, and it was wrong. The players were also smaller and slower with them than players are naturally without. Records from then don't even stand now anyway. They have almost all been broken. Players today make more tackles, throw more yards, run for more yards, get more sacks etc.

Steroid usage is cheating, if you don't think so, then fine. I don't agree, and nor do most people.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 03:18 PM
I don't have to put them in my favour, my point is there is no data that supports your argument that does not have huge holes in it. How many sports are there in America, or the world? How many pro athletes are there? How many people could be a pro athlete? Stop using your stupid stat which has no evidence. As the other guy said, its off topic anyway. Steroids are wrong. If you don't think so, you are ****** in the head.

Tell me what numbers you want me to use???

It's not off topic. Point was PEDs do not do anything for most of us and most of us will not play a Pro Sport no matter how much we take.

Genetics plays the biggest part, that was my point. Like I said I can use any numbers you want, and until you refute my numbers with your numbers than I have no choice but to use my own.

Do you really want me to use the worlds population? If I do that they'll be in my favor.

Also I did include athletes of other Pro sports. I used that magic number 200,000 to account for all athletes good enough to play NFL football but did not do to other circumstances (such as had a kid, played another sport, etc, etc). Should I have used 400,000?

OK let's use 400,000 (400,000 is 20 times the number of all current and former NFL players). In other words, that is saying for every kid that played NFL Football there are 19 kids just as genetically gifted has him.

So if we use 400,000 that works out to be about 99.6%. That is 99.6% of us are not genetically gifted enough to play NFL football.

If you do not like this number, tell me what numbers you want me to use????

bucfan12
06-13-2011, 03:19 PM
No response to my point on your "educate the players on PED usage".

Of course they did, and it was wrong. The players were also smaller and slower with them than players are naturally without. Records from then don't even stand now anyway. They have almost all been broken. Players today make more tackles, throw more yards, run for more yards, get more sacks etc.

Steroid usage is cheating, if you don't think so, then fine. I don't agree, and nor do most people.

In my opinion, there are a huge difference between PEDs and HGH and Steriods.

There are banned supplements by professional sports leagues that you can get at you're local GNC. Trust me, those aren't actual steriods as you cannot 'blow' up on those type of supplements such as creatine or those test boosters. However, those test boosters are used as off cycles once an athlete gets off a HGH or Steriod product to restore estrogen levels and boost testosterone.

If players today are getting that big, they are definately using an illegal steriod or HGH. HGH is my guess because you can absolutely put on 20-25 lbs of muscle like that without getting caught (as there is no HGH testing in the NFL). Look at Brian Cushing. Reports had it that he was a schrimp in college freshman year and he just flat out bulked up (veins popping out the neck and all of his muscles). You'd have to be stupid not to think he was taking something.

Look at some of these players in the neck area with veins popping out. That is one of the signs of steriod usage.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 03:23 PM
Steroids are wrong. If you don't think so, you are ****** in the head.

Steroids is wrong
Smoking is wrong
Doing double back-flips in the X-games is wrong

However, if there is no victim then there is no crime. But being a Moral Policeman, I know you love victimless crime.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 03:24 PM
Tell me what numbers you want me to use???

It's not off topic. Point was PEDs do not do anything for most of us and most of us will not play a Pro Sport no matter how much we take.

Genetics plays the biggest part, that was my point. Like I said I can use any numbers you want, and until you refute my numbers with your numbers than I have no choice but to use my own.

Do you really want me to use the worlds population? If I do that they'll be in my favor.

Also I did include athletes of other Pro sports. I used that magic number 200,000 to account for all athletes good enough to play NFL football but did not do to other circumstances (such as had a kid, played another sport, etc, etc). Should I have used 400,000?

OK let's use 400,000 (400,000 is 20 times the number of all current and former NFL players). In other words, that is saying for every kid that played NFL Football there are 19 kids just as genetically gifted has him.

So if we use 400,000 that works out to be about 99.6%. That is 99.6% of us are not genetically gifted enough to play NFL football.

If you do not like this number, tell me what numbers you want me to use????

Don't you understand, THERE ARE NO NUMBERS you can't quantify it!

If i use an arbitrary number it doesn't mean anything. Your argument means nothing because it is a number YOU MADE UP.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 03:26 PM
Steroids is wrong
Smoking is wrong
Doing double back-flips in the X-games is wrong

However, if there is no victim then there is no crime. But being a Moral Policeman, I know you love victimless crime.

Taking steroids in high school so you get a scholarship in place of someone else.

Taking Steroids in college so you get drafted in place of someone else.

taking steroids in the pro's so you make more money than someone else.

Tell me where there are no victims.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 03:30 PM
In my opinion, there are a huge difference between PEDs and HGH and Steriods.

There are banned supplements by professional sports leagues that you can get at you're local GNC. Trust me, those aren't actual steriods as you cannot 'blow' up on those type of supplements such as creatine or those test boosters. However, those test boosters are used as off cycles once an athlete gets off a HGH or Steriod product to restore estrogen levels and boost testosterone.

If players today are getting that big, they are definately using an illegal steriod or HGH. HGH is my guess because you can absolutely put on 20-25 lbs of muscle like that without getting caught (as there is no HGH testing in the NFL). Look at Brian Cushing. Reports had it that he was a schrimp in college freshman year and he just flat out bulked up (veins popping out the neck and all of his muscles). You'd have to be stupid not to think he was taking something.

Look at some of these players in the neck area with veins popping out. That is one of the signs of steriod usage.

Creatine isn't banned and we are not talking about creatine. Alll creatine does is put more water into the muscles.

Yes HGH is what ericartman seems to think should be injected into every player, that way every1 is equal! Every player is also equal if they DON'T do this. And Cushing is probs going easy on the roids, look at his numbers the year after he was caught.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 03:34 PM
Don't you understand, THERE ARE NO NUMBERS you can't quantify it!

If i use an arbitrary number it doesn't mean anything. Your argument means nothing because it is a number YOU MADE UP.

400,000 means that there are 400,000 males in this country today that are athletically gifted enough to play (or have played) NFL Football. I think this is quite a huge number. I would say it is about 4 times over that of the actual number.

Again I am doing this for you!!! I am working the numbers in your favor. We don't have to use 400,000... lets use 800,000!


If we use 800,000.. then that means 99.29824% are not athletically gifted enough to play NFL football.

If you don't like 800,000 should we use 1.6 million then????

I want to use a number that will make you happy.

FUNBUNCHER
06-13-2011, 03:36 PM
Really, a better number would be how many people have played organized football at some point.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 03:41 PM
400,000 means that there are 400,000 males in this country today that are athletically gifted enough to play (or have played) NFL Football. I think this is quite a huge number. I would say it is about 4 times over that of the actual number.

Again I am doing this for you!!! I am working the numbers in your favor. We don't have to use 400,000... lets use 800,000!


If we use 800,000.. then that means 99.29824% are not athletically gifted enough to play NFL football.

If you don't like 800,000 should we use 1.6 million then????

I want to use a number that will make you happy.

Are you an idiot? this is the last time i will say this. THERE IS NO NUMBER BECAUSE YOU CAN'T QUANTIFY IT! You are pulling a number out of the air which means nothing because there are variables that no one can contol. I don't have a number, because i'm not stupid enough to just pick a random number and use it as a premise for my argument.

bigbluedefense
06-13-2011, 03:42 PM
wrong thread.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 03:47 PM
Taking steroids in high school so you get a scholarship in place of someone else.

Taking Steroids in college so you get drafted in place of someone else.

taking steroids in the pro's so you make more money than someone else.

Tell me where there are no victims.


I knew you were going to go there! Like a good trapper I was just waiting for you to respond with that! I should change my handle to TrapperCartmann.

Once you are in the game, you are no longer a "victim", you are a "player". If you want to continue being a player, then that is just part of the game. I know it sucks, but how are we going to stop this at the HS level? Even at the Pro level I don't see any way to permanently stop PED usage. Whatever rules you put in place will only be solved temporarily.

Also, I thought we were only talking about NFL, but if you want to introduce HS players, we can do that too. So are you saying we should mandate complete testing for HS students too? Who is going to pay for all this?

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 03:56 PM
Are you an idiot? this is the last time i will say this. THERE IS NO NUMBER BECAUSE YOU CAN'T QUANTIFY IT! You are pulling a number out of the air which means nothing because there are variables that no one can contol. I don't have a number, because i'm not stupid enough to just pick a random number and use it as a premise for my argument.


Don't you think 800,000 is a big exaggeration???

I am sure there is a number we all can agree on, and whatever number that is, I will quadruple it in your favor to help your cause even further.

I used 800,000 above, and to me this was already a big exaggerated number (but I am here to help youm hence the reason I exaggerated in your favor). Don't you agree this number is way over exaggerated?

Would you not agree that this number is a huge over estimate?

Even if we use this 800,000 number, and say that there are currently 800,000 males in the country that are/were athletically gifted enough to play NFL football, that means 99.284% of us are not!!!

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 03:57 PM
Wow I lost 6500 points today because of the Moral Police and Nutrionist! Thanks guys, what would the world do without you guys?

Thank you to the guys who just just gave me 900 cred points back.

jack1077
06-13-2011, 04:00 PM
I knew you were going to go there! Like a good trapper I was just waiting for you to respond with that! I should change my handle to TrapperCartmann.

Once you are in the game, you are no longer a "victim", you are a "player". If you want to continue being a player, then that is just part of the game. I know it sucks, but how are we going to stop this at the HS level? Even at the Pro level I don't see any way to permanently stop PED usage. Whatever rules you put in place will only be solved temporarily.

Also, I thought we were only talking about NFL, but if you want to introduce HS players, we can do that too. So are you saying we should mandate complete testing for HS students too? Who is going to pay for all this?

This is it. There is no arguing with someone so clearly stupid. I hope you lose to someone who cheats. Believe steroids are good and everyone should aspire to try and cheat to the best of their ability. Argue that the NFL shouldn't do anything about steroid use because of the cost. Pull arbitrary numbers out of nowhere to try an prove a point that makes less sense. I'm done trying to deal with you. Jack out... Buddy.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 04:02 PM
Creatine isn't banned and we are not talking about creatine. Alll creatine does is put more water into the muscles.

Yes HGH is what ericartman seems to think should be injected into every player, that way every1 is equal! Every player is also equal if they DON'T do this. And Cushing is probs going easy on the roids, look at his numbers the year after he was caught.


Where did I say that?

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 04:17 PM
This is it. There is no arguing with someone so clearly stupid. I hope you lose to someone who cheats. Believe steroids are good and everyone should aspire to try and cheat to the best of their ability. Argue that the NFL shouldn't do anything about steroid use because of the cost. Pull arbitrary numbers out of nowhere to try an prove a point that makes less sense. I'm done trying to deal with you. Jack out... Buddy.


Don't give up! I think I am slowly getting it. Stupid people like me need smart guys like you help make the world a better place.

I think I have lost to cheaters many times. Probably continue to do so though my life. Losing to a cheater gives me a good excuse to cry. Losing to a non-cheater, that just sucks because I have no excuse to cry! haahahaha

The NFL is a business. Every little $10 expenses adds up, the more things cost, the longer it takes to save up for your manhatten penthouse.

I am sure if the NFL were to lose money because they did test enough, they would take action. But since they are not, why would they?

I am sure if we had just one guy that OD'd and croak in a game due to high levels of whatever (pick your favorite PED here), then I am sure the NFL will do somethign about it.

As of right now, if you were to implement heavy drug testing, and expose all these cheaters, that will most definitely tarnish the game. Why create a bad situation for yourself?

Not saying this is right, but the NFL first and foremost is a business. I know the Morale Policeman don't like to hear this, but oh well.

Besides, there were rumors the great Jerry Rice even took PEDs. He once gained 15 lbs of lean muscule mass in one year at 39 years of age. It's rare for 19 year olds to do this, but at 39? This is not suspicious?

What if we found out with 100% proof that the great Jerry Rice cheated? I am sure this will negatively impacted the game. Give NFL the bad pub they are not looking for.

FUNBUNCHER
06-13-2011, 04:27 PM
I knew you were going to go there! Like a good trapper I was just waiting for you to respond with that! I should change my handle to TrapperCartmann.

Once you are in the game, you are no longer a "victim", you are a "player". If you want to continue being a player, then that is just part of the game. I know it sucks, but how are we going to stop this at the HS level? Even at the Pro level I don't see any way to permanently stop PED usage. Whatever rules you put in place will only be solved temporarily.

Also, I thought we were only talking about NFL, but if you want to introduce HS players, we can do that too. So are you saying we should mandate complete testing for HS students too? Who is going to pay for all this?


They randomly drug test HS athletes in Texas for PEDs, because the usage was suspected to be rampant throughout the early part of the decade.

It's all about priorities and what you value about sport.

I never heard or read that Jerry Rice gained 15# of lean muscle in one year at 39 years of age, but since the guy never ever lifted to gain mass, I wouldn't call it freakish, just unusual.

I'm gonna google search this nugget, just to be sure you aren't throwing firebombs!!lol

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 04:38 PM
I never heard or read that Jerry Rice gained 15# of lean muscle in one year at 39 years of age, but since the guy never ever lifted to gain mass, I wouldn't call it freakish, just unusual.

I'm gonna google search this nugget, just to be sure you aren't throwing firebombs!!lol

People are pretty much set in their ways and their beliefs. I am sure most will defend Jerry Rice at all cost even though they have never met him and don't know a single thing about the guy.

Jerry Rice is an "Untouchable".

He got caught at massage parlor during a police raid. He did not get any trouble for this.

There is a Club in San Jose that 49ers/Raiders use to frequent, a buddy of mine bounced there and he told me the great "family man" Jerry Rice took a different girl home with him every week.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 04:41 PM
They randomly drug test HS athletes in Texas for PEDs, because the usage was suspected to be rampant throughout the early part of the decade.

It's all about priorities and what you value about sport.



Or at the very least pretend that you care, and pretend that you have priorities and value the sport. This is how you create positive pub.

All you have to do is tell all the sheeps how you are anti drug and pretend to test. Also it's good to ban players, the ones that sits on the bench, to show the world how "effective" your testing is.

FUNBUNCHER
06-13-2011, 05:05 PM
Or at the very least pretend that you care, and pretend that you have priorities and value the sport. This is how you create positive pub.

All you have to do is tell all the sheeps how you are anti drug and pretend to test. Also it's good to ban players, the ones that sits on the bench, to show the world how "effective" your testing is.

You're criminal-minded, my friend. Civil society is the goal, not a destination.

Rape happens everyday. Kids are molested everyday. Armed robbery, insider trading, tax fraud, auto theft, murder, etc. is happening somewhere, right now.

Just because you can't stop it forever doesn't mean you stop trying.

Our modern society survives based on a dynamic tension between the id and super-ego. When you concede everything to the Id, (our most basic, selfish desires and impulses), we might as well revert back to living in caves and wearing bearskins.

Just because there's cheating in the NFL doesn't make it 'okay'.

And Jerry Rice isn't untouchable. But I would love to see a reference somewhere or a report that he gained 15# in 12 months at 39 yrsold.
Again, if a guy has NEVER lifted to gain weight, all of a sudden works out with heavy weights to gain mass, I don't think it's that impossible, just kind of rare.

BTW, WADA doesn't 'pretend' to test people. The NFL won't be able to buy the credibility of an organization like WADA.

If the NFL unleashes that beast on the NFL, they will eliminate IMO 90% of most PED use in pro football.

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 05:51 PM
You're criminal-minded, my friend. Civil society is the goal, not a destination.

Rape happens everyday. Kids are molested everyday. Armed robbery, insider trading, tax fraud, auto theft, murder, etc. is happening somewhere, right now.

Just because you can't stop it forever doesn't mean you stop trying.

Our modern society survives based on a dynamic tension between the id and super-ego. When you concede everything to the Id, (our most basic, selfish desires and impulses), we might as well revert back to living in caves and wearing bearskins.

Just because there's cheating in the NFL doesn't make it 'okay'.

And Jerry Rice isn't untouchable. But I would love to see a reference somewhere or a report that he gained 15# in 12 months at 39 yrsold.
Again, if a guy has NEVER lifted to gain weight, all of a sudden works out with heavy weights to gain mass, I don't think it's that impossible, just kind of rare.

BTW, WADA doesn't 'pretend' to test people. The NFL won't be able to buy the credibility of an organization like WADA.

If the NFL unleashes that beast on the NFL, they will eliminate IMO 90% of most PED use in pro football.


Please don't kill the Messenger. I am just informing everyone how the game is played.

I myself do not have a criminal record, and treat my friends/family with respect so how am I criminally minded?

For your information, you can take a PED without living in a cave. Many do it! Or should they go live in caves because they lost the basis for all humanity?

Also, who why are you bringing up molested kids and armed robbery? I thought we talking about PED usage? Oh right Jupiter stealing gas from Saturn.

You seem to want to put PED users on the same level as child molesters and murderers. It's a common tactic, associate a certain group with murderers and child molesters to help your cause right?

FUNBUNCHER
06-13-2011, 10:42 PM
You're ethically challenged is all I'm saying, Eric.

A 'criminal mindset' IMO is when you start to believe breaking rules, cutting corners, lying and cheating is acceptable behavior in society, because in your opinion lots of other people do it too and if you can't beat them, might as well join them.

Taking PEDs IS cheating, but it's one thing for a fan to tolerate it and for another to think they are perfectly fine and acceptable to use in the NFL.

You missed the point behind my previous post, but I'm not surprised.

If I were king of the NFL, I'd want ALL PEDs(specifically muscle-building and blood doping) removed from the game.

descendency
06-13-2011, 11:12 PM
If I were king of the NFL, I'd want ALL PEDs(specifically muscle-building and blood doping) removed from the game.

I completely agree that there is something wrong with steroids in sports, however, I think the average fan likes (even if they don't consciously think it should be ok) the product that steroids have created.

The shirts don't say "Chicks dig small ball" (baseball reference) or "Chicks dig the checkdown".

EricCartmann
06-13-2011, 11:21 PM
You're ethically challenged is all I'm saying, Eric.

A 'criminal mindset' IMO is when you start to believe breaking rules, cutting corners, lying and cheating is acceptable behavior in society, because in your opinion lots of other people do it too and if you can't beat them, might as well join them.

Taking PEDs IS cheating, but it's one thing for a fan to tolerate it and for another to think they are perfectly fine and acceptable to use in the NFL.

You missed the point behind my previous post, but I'm not surprised.

If I were king of the NFL, I'd want ALL PEDs(specifically muscle-building and blood doping) removed from the game.

4 points

1) I am glad we do not see eye to eye on this.
Sometimes I want certain people, such as a "Moral Police Officer" to disagree with me, and if I ever find them agreeing with me, that is God's way of telling me I should off myself.

2) I am not a part of any of this so it really does not concern me. I am just a simple guy that likes to watch Football and I don't try to dictate world policies.

3) I don't consider PED users on the same level as child molesters, thieves, and murders. I am sorry but I just don't.

4) You need to believe whatever it is so you can sleep at night. A good night sleep is what's most important. If you really believe you have such high morals, and that your superior thinking is going to save all of us from evil, then by all means.. GO FOR IT!

5) The Latte Effect -
You seem to suffering with the Latte Effect. You know, people who dictate world policy while sipping their Latte while sitting in their heated office (while it's 30 outside), after their parents paid for their college.

SativaDominant
06-13-2011, 11:50 PM
The NFL has had one of the more stringent testing policies of all the sports leagues when it comes to steroids.

HGH is the real problem, as it can't be tested for outside of a blood test. The WADA says their test works, but why wouldn't they say that? Obviously they'd want the biggest sports leagues in the world to outsource drug testing to them. WADA's in charge of cycling and the Olympics, and there is a ****-ton of corruption that happens in both of those.

Plus, there's the whole other issue that you can find a lot more stuff than just PEDs in blood. And I'm not talking about recreational drugs or anything. You can find pre-existing medical conditions that the player may have no idea about, which could affect his pension/medical benefits after retiring.

Until there's a reliable urine test for HGH, it won't be tested for. Period. And the NFL tries to stay as up to date as possible on anabolics, but there's only so much they can do. There's so much more that goes into it other than "we must oust the cheaterzzzz!!!!!!11'"

EricCartmann
06-14-2011, 12:02 AM
The NFL has had one of the more stringent testing policies of all the sports leagues when it comes to steroids.

HGH is the real problem, as it can't be tested for outside of a blood test. The WADA says their test works, but why wouldn't they say that? Obviously they'd want the biggest sports leagues in the world to outsource drug testing to them. WADA's in charge of cycling and the Olympics, and there is a ****-ton of corruption that happens in both of those.

Plus, there's the whole other issue that you can find a lot more stuff than just PEDs in blood. And I'm not talking about recreational drugs or anything. You can find pre-existing medical conditions that the player may have no idea about, which could affect his pension/medical benefits after retiring.

Until there's a reliable urine test for HGH, it won't be tested for. Period. And the NFL tries to stay as up to date as possible on anabolics, but there's only so much they can do. There's so much more that goes into it other than "we must oust the cheaterzzzz!!!!!!11'"


Quoted for Truth!

FUNBUNCHER
06-14-2011, 12:40 AM
If WADA is contracted by the NFL, they're taking blood tests, I assume. Otherwise the NFL is better off not changing their drug testing procedures.

EricCartmann
06-14-2011, 11:07 AM
If WADA is contracted by the NFL, they're taking blood tests, I assume. Otherwise the NFL is better off not changing their drug testing procedures.

Wow we are right back where from what I have been saying. So therefore that must mean you are as much "criminally minded" as me! ahhhaha

I fully expect more negative points now!

Rosebud
06-14-2011, 11:19 AM
I like pro football and sports in general precisely because they aren't professional wrestling; scripted televsion events with predictable outcomes.

When you tolerate the rampant use of PEDs in the NFL, the 'game' becomes pure entertainment and less of a sport.

*shrug* so just because players are juicing games are scripted? I mean to me it's kinda like an extension of training, some players are going to work out more than others and so have an advantage when games start. To me PEDs are just an extrapolation of that.

Plus I'm not sure what you mean with your "pure entertainment and less of a sport" comment. Sports are a form of entertainment, no?

EricCartmann
06-14-2011, 02:28 PM
If we are going to organize a witch hunt, we first need to know what a witch is.

Now onto page 100!

prock
06-14-2011, 02:50 PM
1) I am glad we do not see eye to eye on this.
Sometimes I want certain people, such as a "Moral Police Officer" to disagree with me, and if I ever find them agreeing with me, that is God's way of telling me I should off myself.



So if you have a solid moral compass you should off yourself?

jack1077
06-14-2011, 02:53 PM
So if you have a solid moral compass you should off yourself?

not a lot of what he says makes sense.

Look at his metaphor a few pages back.

prock
06-14-2011, 03:00 PM
Haha, I also loved how he made fun of FUNBUNCHER for his parents paying for college when this kid is probably 5 years away from finishing high school.

jack1077
06-14-2011, 03:02 PM
Haha, I also loved how he made fun of FUNBUNCHER for his parents paying for college when this kid is probably 5 years away from finishing high school.

Eric Cartman has to be close to like 16 or 17 now right?

prock
06-14-2011, 03:03 PM
Eric Cartman has to be close to like 16 or 17 now right?

No, they don't get older.

jack1077
06-14-2011, 03:12 PM
If WADA is contracted by the NFL, they're taking blood tests, I assume. Otherwise the NFL is better off not changing their drug testing procedures.

My message to you is to not feed the troll.

EricCartmann
06-14-2011, 03:52 PM
So if you have a solid moral compass you should off yourself?

Please allow me to explain if I may.

I know I have good morals. The problem with the "Moral Police Officers" is their view of morality is slightly skewed. They do not know this.

If I ever find myself agreeing with the "Moral Police Officers", that is God's message to me that I should off myself.

How are their views skewed you ask? Well they suffer from the Latte Effect.
Latte Effect: Preaching morality and world views based on your own personal view, while sipping on a Latte while sitting a heated office while it is 30 degrees outside, after your parents paid for your college.

EricCartmann
06-14-2011, 03:53 PM
not a lot of what he says makes sense.

Look at his metaphor a few pages back.


Yeah like you make total sense. From here forward please don't agree with me on anything. If you don't agree, that's how I know the world is right, if I find you agreeing with me that is probably a message from God I should off myself.

EricCartmann
06-14-2011, 03:54 PM
Haha, I also loved how he made fun of FUNBUNCHER for his parents paying for college when this kid is probably 5 years away from finishing high school.

Thank you. I do look young for my 40 years of age. After serving one 4 year Enlistment, and getting completing my Bachelors in Electrical Engineering that the Army paid for.

EricCartmann
06-14-2011, 03:55 PM
Eric Cartman has to be close to like 16 or 17 now right?

Thank you. I do look young for my 40 years of age. After serving one 4 year Enlistment, and getting completing my Bachelors in Electrical Engineering that the Army paid for.

EricCartmann
06-14-2011, 03:56 PM
My message to you is to not feed the troll.

Not a Troll! A Trapper!

Thank you for complying. Or at least making the effort.

prock
06-14-2011, 03:56 PM
So what you are saying is that no one should have any opinions, morals, or values since they will obviously be skewed? You never even explained why they would be skewed. The only thing that explanation did was make you sound dumber.

EricCartmann
06-14-2011, 03:59 PM
So what you are saying is that no one should have any opinions, morals, or values since they will obviously be skewed? You never even explained why they would be skewed. The only thing that explanation did was make you sound dumber.

That's why I need smart guys like you to make me smarter.

How is not enforcing PED testing lacking morals? Just because I don't like to participate in witch hunts makes me immoral?

Before I participate in any witch hunt I have to first understand what a witch is, and why are they so bad?

EricCartmann
06-14-2011, 04:01 PM
If WADA is contracted by the NFL, they're taking blood tests, I assume. Otherwise the NFL is better off not changing their drug testing procedures.

You guys are missing the entire point totally, from above you can see that me and Funbucher finally agreed. So therefore he too must be "Immoral"!!!

prock
06-14-2011, 04:02 PM
How is testing for steroids a witch hunt? Steroids are cheating and illegal. To test for them isn't a witch hunt. It is just enforcing rules. Not wanting to test for steroids is condoning cheating. Cheating is immoral. Ya get it?

I don't even know why I keep responding to this troll.

jack1077
06-14-2011, 04:06 PM
Thank you. I do look young for my 40 years of age. After serving one 4 year Enlistment, and getting completing my Bachelors in Electrical Engineering that the Army paid for.

i don't think you get what i was going for there...

jack1077
06-14-2011, 04:10 PM
How is testing for steroids a witch hunt? Steroids are cheating and illegal. To test for them isn't a witch hunt. It is just enforcing rules. Not wanting to test for steroids is condoning cheating. Cheating is immoral. Ya get it?

I don't even know why I keep responding to this troll.

No no no! He's a trapper! The dudes an idiot. Being the 'Morale Policeman' that i am, i guess i am doomed to a life stopping people from committing illegal acts and finding problems with people cheating the system. Woh on me.

EricCartmann
06-14-2011, 04:19 PM
How is testing for steroids a witch hunt? Steroids are cheating and illegal. To test for them isn't a witch hunt. It is just enforcing rules. Not wanting to test for steroids is condoning cheating. Cheating is immoral. Ya get it?

I don't even know why I keep responding to this troll.


Trapper! You keep responding because you like to generalize things and you want me to clear it up for you. Which I am more than happy to do because I enjoy your presence. I for one am happy to have dialogue with you to discuss.

The real problem are certain PEDs are not detectable with current testing procedures. No matter what PED the NFL deems illegal, there will be guys who get around all this by creating cocktails not detectable.

I think the whole problem with your guys thinking is that you already stated that certain Illegal PEDs should be allowed and some not.

You guys seem to have a problem with PEDs that give you quick muscle growth in a short period of time.

However, you seem to be OK with PEDs that:
- allow you to quickly recover from injuries
- allow you to quickly recover from a workout, to enable you to work out again
- allow to get more endurance, and let you last well past the 4th qtr.
- allow you to cover up pain and function normally

I for one say we would just allow it all. Does this make me immoral? Is this truly cheating? Like I said, 99.99% of it is Genetics anyways. For normal people like you and I, we will not be at these guys level no matter how much we take.

Again, I am sorry if I do not put PED users on the same level as theives and murderers.

EricCartmann
06-14-2011, 04:20 PM
i don't think you get what i was going for there...

Which is good. If I ever do, I think it's time I off myself.

EricCartmann
06-14-2011, 04:20 PM
No no no! He's a trapper! The dudes an idiot. Being the 'Morale Policeman' that i am, i guess i am doomed to a life stopping people from committing illegal acts and finding problems with people cheating the system. Woh on me.

If you ever call me smart, then that is time I worry. Time for me to off myself.

niel89
06-14-2011, 04:23 PM
Here EricCartmann I think this belongs to you.

http://vaskolius.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/youve-activated-my-trap-card.jpg?w=500&h=367

EricCartmann
06-14-2011, 04:25 PM
Here EricCartmann I think this belongs to you.

http://vaskolius.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/youve-activated-my-trap-card.jpg?w=500&h=367

LOL!!!! Thank you! I am going to use that from here forward.

jack1077
06-14-2011, 04:43 PM
If you ever call me smart, then that is time I worry. Time for me to off myself.

If anyone calls you smart, it's time for all of us too worry.

EricCartmann
06-14-2011, 06:06 PM
If anyone calls you smart, it's time for all of us too worry.

I fully expect you to say that, if you said anything less, it's time to off myself.

jack1077
06-14-2011, 08:10 PM
I fully expect you to say that, if you said anything less, it's time to off myself.

Oh My God! I completely Trapped you there! They should call me trapper Jack!

EricCartmann
06-14-2011, 08:19 PM
Oh My God! I completely Trapped you there! They should call me trapper Jack!

Actually I wanted you to trap me there. That's one of those trap I don't mind falling into. Like you using Kate Beckinsale for bate, and I fell for the trap, and I ended up living with her for the next year.

It's a trap I want to fall for!

EricCartmann
06-14-2011, 08:20 PM
Do you want to be a Trapper now Jack?

jack1077
06-14-2011, 08:25 PM
Do you want to be a Trapper now Jack?

You know Eric, sometimes i think you are to ignorance what Bill O'Reilly is to Stephen Colbert. And sometimes i think you are to troll what Stephen Colbert is to Bill O'Reilly. By the way, the second half of that was a compliment.

EricCartmann
06-14-2011, 10:34 PM
You know Eric, sometimes i think you are to ignorance what Bill O'Reilly is to Stephen Colbert. And sometimes i think you are to troll what Stephen Colbert is to Bill O'Reilly.

Nope.

I just don't believe in witch hunts when I don't even know what a witch is. I also don't believe in educating others on morality based on my own personal experiences from my own small box. I am not a "Moral Police Officer" like you.

In this situation, the only one that should be organizing a witch hunt, or determine what is cheating and what is not cheating is the NFL and the NFLPA, and maybe include some expert MD's thrown in for advisors.

Me I am just going to watch football.

If you don't agree, I am perfectly fine with that. It just gives me a green light that we have different ideas and philosophies, and if I ever find that we do agree, I think that might be a clue that God is sending me a message to off myself.

jack1077
06-14-2011, 11:19 PM
Nope.

I just don't believe in witch hunts when I don't even know what a witch is. I also don't believe in educating others on morality based on my own personal experiences in my own small box. I am not a "Moral Police Officer" like you.

Being against PED usage is something that MOST people and ALL sporting organisations are against. I don't try to educate anybody on anything. Funbuncher's example is a good one and he is not saying PED users are equal too murderers and child molesters. He is saying that we as a society try to stop injustice, even if people get away with it. If you don't think the athletes who have a problem with taking PED's are suffering injustice, then i can say categorically that you are wrong. I'm not teaching you anything, just pointing out that it is theft. A crime, with a victim. They are not 'players' in the game of sports filled steroids as you described it earlier. How can you blame any athlete who does not take PED's and say it is their fault that they are not playing the game? You are basically saying that a flaw in an athletes character is 'won't break the law, go against their morales and rules of football by taking PED's'. I find it difficult to think many would agree with that. I am not misrepresenting you at all btw. Here is exactly what you said:

"Once you are in the game, you are no longer a "victim", you are a "player". If you want to continue being a player, then that is just part of the game. I know it sucks, but how are we going to stop this at the HS level? Even at the Pro level I don't see any way to permanently stop PED usage. Whatever rules you put in place will only be solved temporarily."

In this situation, the only one that should be organizing a witch hunt, or determine what is cheating and what is not cheating is the NFL and the NFLPA, and maybe include some expert MD's thrown in for advisors.

Me I am just going to watch football.

Condone PED use.

If you don't agree, I am perfectly fine with that. It just gives me a green light that we have different ideas and philosophies, and if I ever find that we do agree, I think that might be a clue that God is sending me a message to off myself.

I'm so glad I'm an atheist.

jack1077
06-15-2011, 12:35 AM
Where did I say that?

"Once you are in the game, you are no longer a "victim", you are a "player". If you want to continue being a player, then that is just part of the game. I know it sucks, but how are we going to stop this at the HS level? Even at the Pro level I don't see any way to permanently stop PED usage. Whatever rules you put in place will only be solved temporarily."

EricCartmann
06-15-2011, 12:39 AM
"Once you are in the game, you are no longer a "victim", you are a "player". If you want to continue being a player, then that is just part of the game. I know it sucks, but how are we going to stop this at the HS level? Even at the Pro level I don't see any way to permanently stop PED usage. Whatever rules you put in place will only be solved temporarily."

Yes I did say that. And?

jack1077
06-15-2011, 12:41 AM
Once you are in the game, you are no longer a "victim", you are a "player". If you want to continue being a player, then that is just part of the game. I know it sucks, but how are we going to stop this at the HS level? Even at the Pro level I don't see any way to permanently stop PED usage. Whatever rules you put in place will only be solved temporarily.

Yes I did say that. And?

That is you justifying every player taking HGH because they are 'playing the game'.

EricCartmann
06-15-2011, 12:43 AM
That is you justifying every player taking HGH because they are 'playing the game'.

They do have an NFLPA, maybe all the players should voice their complaints to it?

As an outsider, not only do I not see a way to stop it, but I feel it is none of my business. Stopping it is up to the NFL and NFLPA. It is their bodies, and their life, not mine.

jack1077
06-15-2011, 12:56 AM
They do have an NFLPA, maybe all the players should voice their complaints to it?

As an outsider, not only do I not see a way to stop it, but I feel it is none of my business. Stopping it is up to the NFL and NFLPA. It is their bodies, and their life, not mine.

So now you are going back to the "their bodies, their decisions" argument. I just showed you how taking PED's disadvantages those who don't use them and it is THEFT. It is NOT a victimless crime. You said, players who don't take them should get over it and take them to compete. You are actually advocating for people to break their morales and the law just so they have the chance to COMPETE. Why don't you just say, "whoever on this team can take the most PED's and not die, you are in." I don't get it, next you will go back to your bogus numbers. You don't have a leg to stand on and just keep bringing back old points that don't make sense. What's next? I trapped you!

EricCartmann
06-15-2011, 01:09 AM
So now you are going back to the "their bodies, their decisions" argument. I just showed you how taking PED's disadvantages those who don't use them and it is THEFT. It is NOT a victimless crime. You said, players who don't take them should get over it and take them to compete. You are actually advocating for people to break their morales and the law just so they have the chance to COMPETE. Why don't you just say, "whoever on this team can take the most PED's and not die, you are in." I don't get it, next you will go back to your bogus numbers. You don't have a leg to stand on and just keep bringing back old points that don't make sense. What's next? I trapped you!


Can you truly define what is a PED? Spell it out?

If I was a player who did not take illegal PEDs and suspected others are, I would voice my feelings one guy feels like others are cheating, he should voice his opinion to the NFL and NFLPA. He is a player, I am not. He is not a victim if he takes action.

As an outsider, I feel it's none of my business to regulate a body that already has regulation in place. That's because I am not a Moral Police Officer like you.

jack1077
06-15-2011, 01:16 AM
Can you truly define what is a PED? Spell it out?

If I was a player who did not take illegal PEDs and suspected others are, I would voice my feelings one guy feels like others are cheating, he should voice his opinion to the NFL and NFLPA. He is a player, I am not. He is not a victim if he takes action.

As an outsider, I feel it's none of my business to regulate a body that already has regulation in place. That's because I am not a Moral Police Officer like you.

Your best argument is "what are PED's? I don't Know? And, you are a 'Morale Police Officer', i am just ignorant, therefore i don't care what people do.' If you don't care then don't say anything. My point is, a player doesn't make it to the nfl because, they didn't take the PED's. They have no one to complain too. What would they do? Tell their coach? Coach kicks them off the team for not being a team player. Tell the media? They are labelled a liar because no one has 'shown a positive test' and none of their friends ever talk to them again. Tell the NFL. The NFL knows what's happening, that's the point. They don't care. They tell people when and what they are testing for. Watch the Bill Romanowski interview. Listen to what Tony Mandarich says. They all the same thing. The NFL makes it easy to cheat the tests. The NCAA makes it easy to cheat the tests. Everyone is doing it, but the NFL does not care. That is the crux of the issue.

PED - amphetamines, androstendione, erythropoietin, hGH, testosterone, known or thought to improve performance in a particular activity.

Defined. Don't see whole milk in there shockingly.

EricCartmann
06-15-2011, 01:25 AM
Why don't you just say, "whoever on this team can take the most PED's and not die, you are in." I don't get it, next you will go back to your bogus numbers. You don't have a leg to stand on and just keep bringing back old points that don't make sense. What's next? I trapped you!

How about whoever smoke the most and not die? Or whoever can drink the most and not die?

I don't believe I should be telling these guys how to live their lives.

Bogus numbers? What bogus numbers?

- There are 1760 Current NFL Players, that is one thousand seven hundred sixty
- There are 114 Million Adult Males in this country

These numbers above are very real.

The below number is an over exaggeration to work in your favor:
- there are 1,600,000 (that's 1.6 million) guys genetically gifted enough to play or have played NFL football, but for whatever reasons did not, reasons such as: they did not work hard enough, they played another sport, etc).

1,600,000/114,000,000 = .011428

.011428 * 100 = 1.1428%

Even using a very high exaggerated number in your favor, it still works out to be only 1.1428%. That is, only 1.1428% of us are genetically gifted enough to play NFL football. That means 98.85% of us are not. Now keep in mind I am purposely way over inflating the number to 1.6 million to help you.

jack1077
06-15-2011, 01:28 AM
How about whoever smoke the most and not die? Or whoever can drink the most and not die?

I don't believe I should be telling these guys how to live their lives.

Bogus numbers? What bogus numbers?

- There are 1760 Current NFL Players, that is one thousand seven hundred sixty
- There are 114 Million Adult Males in this country

These numbers above are very real.

The below number is an over exaggeration to work in your favor:
- there are 1,600,000 (that's 1.6 million) guys genetically gifted enough to play or have played NFL football, but for whatever reasons did not, reasons such as: they did not work hard enough, they played another sport, etc).

1,600,000/114,000,000 = .011428

.011428 * 100 = 1.1428%

Even using a very high exaggerated number in your favor, it still works out to be only 1.1428%. That is, only 1.1428% of us are genetically gifted enough to play NFL football. That means 98.85% of us are not. Now keep in mind I am purposely way over inflating the number to 1.6 million to help you.

HOW MANY WANTED TO BE NFL PLAYERS?! HOW MANY ARE ATHLETES IN OTHER SPORTS BUT HAD THE TALENT! HOW MANY ARE ELDERLY!? HOW MANY ARE ********?! Your numbers are ridiculous because they assume every man wanted to play in the NFL and they only ever chose football and not other sports as i pointed out earlier!

EricCartmann
06-15-2011, 01:31 AM
Your best argument is "what are PED's? I don't Know? And, you are a 'Morale Police Officer', i am just ignorant, therefore i don't care what people do.' If you don't care then don't say anything. My point is, a player doesn't make it to the nfl because, they didn't take the PED's. They have no one to complain too. What would they do? Tell their coach? Coach kicks them off the team for not being a team player. Tell the media? They are labelled a liar because no one has 'shown a positive test' and none of their friends ever talk to them again. Tell the NFL. The NFL knows what's happening, that's the point. They don't care. They tell people when and what they are testing for. Watch the Bill Romanowski interview. Listen to what Tony Mandarich says. They all the same thing. The NFL makes it easy to cheat the tests. The NCAA makes it easy to cheat the tests. Everyone is doing it, but the NFL does not care. That is the crux of the issue.

PED - amphetamines, androstendione, erythropoietin, hGH, testosterone, known or thought to improve performance in a particular activity.

Defined. Don't see whole milk in there shockingly.


So who are you protecting exactly? Why do you feel it is your duty to govern the NFL and demand justice for the nameless player?

If a guy fights for what he believes in he will do it regardless if the outcome might turn out bad.

As an outsider, it is not my job to police a private club that only a few select can join.

PED List - So if a player is not taking anything you have listed then that means he is not using a PED right?

jack1077
06-15-2011, 01:36 AM
So who are you protecting exactly? Why do you feel it is your duty to govern the NFL and demand justice for the nameless player?

If a guy fights for what he believes in he will do it regardless if the outcome might turn out bad.

As an outsider, it is not my job to police a private club that only a few select can join.

PED List - So if a player is not taking anything you have listed then that means he is not using a PED right?

That is a basis of PED's. Obviously people use masking agents etc so they are out as well. But drinking Whole Milk won't benfit someone anymore than eating a steak.

Yes, i want steroids out of the game. I want the NFL to burn for 1 year, then be a fairer competition.

The NFL exists because of people like you and me so i don't feel bad for asking for this out of them.

Who am i protecting? Sport. If the NFL comes out and says they are 'entertainment' not sport, i will shut up and not watch it. While it is a SPORT, i feel i have a right to want the players to be clean.

EricCartmann
06-15-2011, 01:37 AM
HOW MANY WANTED TO BE NFL PLAYERS?! HOW MANY ARE ATHLETES IN OTHER SPORTS BUT HAD THE TALENT! HOW MANY ARE ELDERLY!? HOW MANY ARE ********?! Your numbers are ridiculous because they assume every man wanted to play in the NFL and they only ever chose football and not other sports as i pointed out earlier!

That's why I way over estimated! To help you!

1.6 Million out of 114 million are a lot of individuals. It means that 25 guys in your graduating class of 1000 guys were capable of playing NFL football. Or 12.5 guys out of your graduating class of 500 guys were capable of playing pro football.

I went to a HS that made it to the Section Finals in Football playing against Mighty De La Salle, and even this team, we only had one guy good enough to get a D1 Scholarship to Major Program. The other studs went on to play at D2 schools or JC, None of these guys played pro football. This from a team that was section runner up.

Can you not see I am using the numbers in your favor? Even doing so you can see that it's still only 1 out of 100. The real numbers are probably closer to 1 out of 1000. However, I am here for you my friend and buddy!

jack1077
06-15-2011, 01:40 AM
That's why I way over estimated! To help you!

1.6 Million out of 114 million are a lot of individuals. It means that 25 guys in your graduating class of 1000 guys were capable of playing NFL football. Or 12.5 guys out of your graduating class of 500 guys were capable of playing pro football.

I went to a HS that made it to the Section Finals in Football playing against Mighty De La Salle, and even this team, we only had one guy good enough to get a D1 Scholarship to Major Program. The other studs went on to play at D2 schools or JC, None of these guys played pro football. This from a team that was section runner up.

Can you not see I am using the numbers in your favor? Even doing so you can see that it's still only 1 out of 100. The real numbers are probably closer to 1 out of 1000. However, I am here for you my friend and buddy!

How many people in the school didn't play but had the talent? You lose right there. You don't know. That's my point. There are no numbers.

jack1077
06-15-2011, 01:40 AM
No more feeding the troll. Promise.

EricCartmann
06-15-2011, 01:41 AM
That is a basis of PED's. Obviously people use masking agents etc so they are out as well. But drinking Whole Milk won't benfit someone anymore than eating a steak.

Yes, i want steroids out of the game. I want the NFL to burn for 1 year, then be a fairer competition.

The NFL exists because of people like you and me so i don't feel bad for asking for this out of them.

Who am i protecting? Sport. If the NFL comes out and says they are 'entertainment' not sport, i will shut up and not watch it. While it is a SPORT, i feel i have a right to want the players to be clean.


Being a player allows you to be a part of NFLPA, as a member of the NFLPA you have a right to voice your complaints.

As an outsider, why are you protecting guys who do not want to be protected?

BTW: Steroids is already banned. It's other PEDs that the NFL seems to have a hard time finding.

If you feel dirty watching football, then why don't you turn off the TV?

EricCartmann
06-15-2011, 01:42 AM
No more feeding the troll. Promise.

Trapper not troll.

EricCartmann
06-15-2011, 01:43 AM
Also can't you see I am not here to help you? Made up numbers in your favor to help you?

Onto page 9! We are getting closer to the goal of 100.

jack1077
06-15-2011, 01:48 AM
Being a player allows you to be a part of NFLPA, as a member of the NFLPA you have a right to voice your complaints.

As an outsider, why are you protecting guys who do not want to be protected?

BTW: Steroids is already banned. It's other PEDs that the NFL seems to have a hard time finding.

If you feel dirty watching football, then why don't you turn off the TV?

You seem to have an awful lot too say for someone who doesn't have an opinion because 'they don't know enough about it'.

I love football, not PED's. The only football i get here is the NFL and NCAA.

No more feeding the troll. I want to leave you with this though:

"Once you are in the game, you are no longer a "victim", you are a "player". If you want to continue being a player, then that is just part of the game. I know it sucks, but how are we going to stop this at the HS level? Even at the Pro level I don't see any way to permanently stop PED usage. Whatever rules you put in place will only be solved temporarily."

"Even whole milk you buy at the grocery store can be considered a PED."

Very well thought out from someone who:

"I don't understand enough about PEDs to know what is cheating and what is not."

EricCartmann
06-15-2011, 01:56 AM
How many people in the school didn't play but had the talent? You lose right there. You don't know. That's my point. There are no numbers.

I worked the numbers way way way in your favor!!!! How many guys went to your high school? 500? 1000?

Are you telling me that there were more than 25 guys in your High School that were talented enough to play NFL football? But did not for whatever reason?

25/1000 is the same ratio as 1.6-million/114-million

EricCartmann
06-15-2011, 01:58 AM
You seem to have an awful lot too say for someone who doesn't have an opinion because 'they don't know enough about it'.

I love football, not PED's. The only football i get here is the NFL and NCAA.

No more feeding the troll. I want to leave you with this though:

"Once you are in the game, you are no longer a "victim", you are a "player". If you want to continue being a player, then that is just part of the game. I know it sucks, but how are we going to stop this at the HS level? Even at the Pro level I don't see any way to permanently stop PED usage. Whatever rules you put in place will only be solved temporarily."

"Even whole milk you buy at the grocery store can be considered a PED."

Very well thought out from someone who:

"I don't understand enough about PEDs to know what is cheating and what is not."

Actually I don't have much to say about it at all.

In this situation, the only one that should be organizing a witch hunt, or determine what is cheating and what is not cheating is the NFL and the NFLPA, and maybe include some expert MD's thrown in for advisors.

Me I am just going to watch football.

If you don't agree, I am perfectly fine with that. It just gives me a green light that we have different ideas and philosophies, and if I ever find that we do agree, I think that might be a clue that God is sending me a message to off myself.

EricCartmann
06-15-2011, 02:03 AM
Most people say "Thank You" when I help them. Now on to page 9!

prock
06-15-2011, 03:17 AM
I have never seen a more persistent ****** in my life.

EricCartmann
06-15-2011, 10:15 AM
I have never seen a more persistent ****** in my life.

Something happened this morning to upset you?

I gave you some positive points just now in hopes to bring you a little joy. Because with Cartmann there is no hate, only love.

EricCartmann
06-20-2011, 09:45 AM
Page 9 is pretty close.

EricCartmann
06-26-2011, 01:50 PM
Daniel Tosh on Steroids

http://comedians.jokes.com/daniel-tosh/videos/daniel-tosh---soccer-and-baseball

descendency
06-26-2011, 05:28 PM
Daniel Tosh on Steroids

http://comedians.jokes.com/daniel-tosh/videos/daniel-tosh---soccer-and-baseball

lmfao. Daniel Tosh = funniest comic in America right now.

EricCartmann
07-04-2011, 09:09 AM
lmfao. Daniel Tosh = funniest comic in America right now.

yes he is! and bump for the trapper!

Vox Populi
07-04-2011, 03:44 PM
I really don't see the problem with people using PEDs if they use them safely. Its just a way for them to get a leg up on the competition the same way that 40 years ago players would spend time exercising all year round and lifting weights to get an edge. Eventually everyone started lifting all the time and there was an even playing field there, then aside from finding incredible new lifting regimens, the next step is obviously sports nutrition, dietary supplements to help fulfill nutritional requirements to maximize muscular and athletic potential. Once every athlete in college can easily subscribe to top of the line exercise and nutritional regimens to increase their performance, the only way they can turn for that extra thing to put them over the top is drugs.

Decades ago people weren't popping glutamine and dozens of spoonfulls/tablets of omega-3's, cyclists weren't blood doping, etc. The thing with me, is that I don't think taking PEDs should be cheating, they are highly accessible and any athlete can get their hands on them, it is just the law that says that they are illegal, but that is because when some idiot who has no idea what they're doing uses them without assistance from experienced medical professionals who understand the substances dies when hes 35 of a stroke in the middle of his set of 3 190 pound quarter arm curls, there is a problem. That person is abusing drugs, athletes using them safely to perform at a higher level, that is just intelligent in my opinion.

Should people have to take them to get to a high level of athletic competition? Well, that entirely depends on what they want. If every single athlete that they are competing against is already on supplements, working out properly and eating properly, then what are they going to do? Accept that they're stuck in a situation where at best they'll be a middle of the pack college player, or do they go find a way to increase their athletic capacity with some drugs?

I understand that ideologically no one should have to manufacture a cocktail of drugs that will allow them to beat someone else on the field. Unfortunately though we are at this point where exercise and dieting are pretty much as advanced as possible without the innovation of new safe drugs that we pass off as supplements instead of a pharmaceutical drug, the only way to get ahead of the people that are doing the same things as you are to increase your work capacity by artifically giving your body the ability to recover more quickly.

Basically, to sum my opinion up, I guess I'd say the NFL should probably crack down on PEDs that are unsafe for consumption that actually significantly lower player's lifespans and/or cause sever side effects that will make their lives miserable after the age of 40, but if any PEDs can be used safely, have at 'em, otherwise you should probably just ban players from going inside a GNC because whether you call it a supplement or a PED, all the stuff in there is a manufactured pharmaceutical that has been deemed safe enough for an idiot to consume at a price that consumers can justify spending the money on.

stephenson86
07-04-2011, 03:46 PM
Everyone should just use them, I would rather see everyone as juiced up monsters running round at lightning speeds than not.

FUNBUNCHER
07-04-2011, 05:00 PM
It's stupid to condone the use of PED in sports on ANY level.

I remember in junior high and HS, the way I dressed, practiced, cleats I bought, number I chose, facemask I selected, etc. was directly influenced by what my pro idols were doing.

Even in college I had an eyes towards whatever I thought professional athletes were doing to excel in the sport.

If you give pro athletes a pass on PEDs, shut the @%@% up when you find out 14 and fifteen year old junior varsity football players are busted trying to score dianabol tabs at the local Gold's gym.

I'm all in favor of an athlete on any level doing whatever they can to gain an edge, but going on the gear distorts the field of competition.

I want to root for the athletes playing for MY team, not the guys who are shooting up the best stuff in their asses.

What's scary about PEDs is what's coming over the horizon.

The final frontier is genetic doping, which involves turning on/off specific genetic switches in an athlete's DNA to make him/her bigger/faster/stronger.

Genetic doping is UNTRACEABLE and some researchers in enhanced athletic performance believe genetic doping could become medically viable in less than 10 years.

Forget about pro football resembling pro wrestling.

The NFL of the near future could have more in common with the latest X-Men movie.

EricCartmann
07-04-2011, 08:49 PM
Everyone should just use them, I would rather see everyone as juiced up monsters running round at lightning speeds than not.

...
... Basically, to sum my opinion up, I guess I'd say the NFL should probably crack down on PEDs that are unsafe for consumption...

I agree with both you guys, however I was waiting for my best friend and buddy Jack to comment.

EricCartmann
07-04-2011, 08:50 PM
It's stupid to condone the use of PED in sports on ANY level.

I remember in junior high and HS, the way I dressed, practiced, cleats I bought, number I chose, facemask I selected, etc. was directly influenced by what my pro idols were doing.

Even in college I had an eyes towards whatever I thought professional athletes were doing to excel in the sport.

If you give pro athletes a pass on PEDs, shut the @%@% up when you find out 14 and fifteen year old junior varsity football players are busted trying to score dianabol tabs at the local Gold's gym.

I'm all in favor of an athlete on any level doing whatever they can to gain an edge, but going on the gear distorts the field of competition.

I want to root for the athletes playing for MY team, not the guys who are shooting up the best stuff in their asses.

What's scary about PEDs is what's coming over the horizon.

The final frontier is genetic doping, which involves turning on/off specific genetic switches in an athlete's DNA to make him/her bigger/faster/stronger.

Genetic doping is UNTRACEABLE and some researchers in enhanced athletic performance believe genetic doping could become medically viable in less than 10 years.

Forget about pro football resembling pro wrestling.

The NFL of the near future could have more in common with the latest X-Men movie.

Just curious.. What did you think when you round out Santa Claus was not real?

FUNBUNCHER
07-05-2011, 03:51 AM
Eric, it's clear you've never played organized sports on any level, never got up at 6AM five days a week in the summer to run 4 miles to get in shape for a sport, never done squats until your legs felt like jello, never benched your bodyweight, never been recruited, never been a scholarship athlete.

Football to you means Xbox and Madden, where the game is virtual and not blood, sweat and tears.

In that case, we can all cheer the day when a 330# DE running a 4.4 blows by an OT off the edge, sacks the QB and his head suddenly pops off.

Look up the definition of 'sports' when you get the chance Eric.

You're equating the 'reality' of Santa Claus to the integrity of pro football??smh

You remind me of idiot guys who watch an NFL game and think out loud, 'if I had the time to work out and really tried, I bet I could play in the NFL.'

Athletics is about testing an individual's character; how hard emotionally, mentally and physically are you able to push yourself to accomplish a goal??

It's not about testing the balance in your bank account to see if you can afford the latest black market PED so you can gain 30# in a month and shave half a second off your 40 time.

Stick to watching cartoons and the next Transformers movie, Eric.
A guy like you will undoubtedly get more out of it.

jack1077
07-05-2011, 05:15 AM
Eric, it's clear you've never played organized sports on any level, never got up at 6AM five days a week in the summer to run 4 miles to get in shape for a sport, never done squats until your legs felt like jello, never benched your bodyweight, never been recruited, never been a scholarship athlete.

Football to you means Xbox and Madden, where the game is virtual and not blood, sweat and tears.

In that case, we can all cheer the day when a 330# DE running a 4.4 blows by an OT off the edge, sacks the QB and his head suddenly pops off.

Look up the definition of 'sports' when you get the chance Eric.

You're equating the 'reality' of Santa Claus to the integrity of pro football??smh

You remind me of idiot guys who watch an NFL game and think out loud, 'if I had the time to work out and really tried, I bet I could play in the NFL.'

Athletics is about testing an individual's character; how hard emotionally, mentally and physically are you able to push yourself to accomplish a goal??

It's not about testing the balance in your bank account to see if you can afford the latest black market PED so you can gain 30# in a month and shave half a second off your 40 time.

Stick to watching cartoons and the next Transformers movie, Eric.
A guy like you will undoubtedly get more out of it.

On any given sunday...

EricCartmann
07-05-2011, 09:01 AM
Eric, it's clear you've never played organized sports on any level, never got up at 6AM five days a week in the summer to run 4 miles to get in shape for a sport, never done squats until your legs felt like jello, never benched your bodyweight, never been recruited, never been a scholarship athlete.

Football to you means Xbox and Madden, where the game is virtual and not blood, sweat and tears.

In that case, we can all cheer the day when a 330# DE running a 4.4 blows by an OT off the edge, sacks the QB and his head suddenly pops off.

Look up the definition of 'sports' when you get the chance Eric.

You're equating the 'reality' of Santa Claus to the integrity of pro football??smh

You remind me of idiot guys who watch an NFL game and think out loud, 'if I had the time to work out and really tried, I bet I could play in the NFL.'

Athletics is about testing an individual's character; how hard emotionally, mentally and physically are you able to push yourself to accomplish a goal??

It's not about testing the balance in your bank account to see if you can afford the latest black market PED so you can gain 30# in a month and shave half a second off your 40 time.

Stick to watching cartoons and the next Transformers movie, Eric.
A guy like you will undoubtedly get more out of it.


Is there where us "Al Bundies" chime in and brag about our high school football days?

FYI: I don't play X-Box or Madden, but I do live in the real world. And yes, I too was hurt when I found out Santa was not real. However, I found out about 30 years ago when I was in the 3rd grade.. if you just found out now, don't sweat it my friend and buddy. It's better late than never.

stephenson86
07-05-2011, 11:52 AM
Is there where us "Al Bundies" chime in and brag about our high school football days?

FYI: I don't play X-Box or Madden, but I do live in the real world. And yes, I too was hurt when I found out Santa was not real. However, I found out about 30 years ago when I was in the 3rd grade.. if you just found out now, don't sweat it my friend and buddy. It's better late than never.

I thought you were like 14...****.

EricCartmann
07-05-2011, 12:11 PM
I thought you were like 14...****.

In Chimpanzee years I am 14.

EricCartmann
07-06-2011, 09:16 PM
Tiger and A-Rod busted! So do not think it's just football players.

http://news.yahoo.com/rods-doc-admits-bringing-unapproved-drugs-us-205711973.html

FUNBUNCHER
07-09-2011, 04:04 PM
Tiger and A-Rod busted! So do not think it's just football players.

http://news.yahoo.com/rods-doc-admits-bringing-unapproved-drugs-us-205711973.html

So what??

A Rod was one of the most physically gifted baseball prospects since Mickey Mantle, but his admission that he used steroids may keep him out of Cooperstown.

If it's ever officially confirmed that Tiger Woods did HGH or worse, I don't care if he wins 50 majors, he'll never be considered one of the greats in his sport.

What's funny is BOTH these guys didn't even need to take crap to be great.
All they had to do is stay in shape and work out hard.

But they got greedy, didn't believe in their talent and became insecure in their ability to work hard NATURALLY to achieve a goal.

Tiger punked out, allegedly.

A Rod definitely punked out.

Because too many pro athletes use juice doesn't mean it's acceptable or should be condoned.

Check what you're arguing in favor of, Cartmann.

You sound like a Wall Street bankster.

jack1077
07-09-2011, 07:00 PM
So what??

A Rod was one of the most physically gifted baseball prospects since Mickey Mantle, but his admission that he used steroids may keep him out of Cooperstown.

If it's ever officially confirmed that Tiger Woods did HGH or worse, I don't care if he wins 50 majors, he'll never be considered one of the greats in his sport.

What's funny is BOTH these guys didn't even need to take crap to be great.
All they had to do is stay in shape and work out hard.

But they got greedy, didn't believe in their talent and became insecure in their ability to work hard NATURALLY to achieve a goal.

Tiger punked out, allegedly.

A Rod definitely punked out.

Because too many pro athletes use juice doesn't mean it's acceptable or should be condoned.

Check what you're arguing in favor of, Cartmann.

You sound like a Wall Street bankster.

Dude, just add him to your ignore list. It has made my life infinitely more pleasant on this site.

batsandgats
07-10-2011, 12:13 PM
Firsty, in your example you assume that only D1 football players ever make it in the NFL. Secondly, you assume that all athletes want to play football and not other sports. Thirdly, you assume that all people in the 100 000 are trying to get D1 football scholarships or trying to play in the NFL, people have other interests. Also, your example does not take into account demographic, injuries etc.

As i have pointed out, using your own examples:

You do not have to be a freak of athletics, just good enough to get by. Does it help being Julius Peppers? Of ******* course it does. Does that mean that all DE's are 6-6 275lbs and run 4.6 - 4.7 fortys? Of course not. London Fletcher is not a freak. Nor is Dexter Coakley. Nor is Danny Woodhead, Wes Welker, Jim Leonard etc. There are players that play other sports that would be NFL players had they been given football as the only choice. I completely disagree with you that every player on the field has to be a freak. Do you have to have good genes, yes. You basically can't have a birth defect. After that, sport is full of success stories about undersized players being champions in every sport, not just the NFL.

Danny Woodhead is an athletic freak, he ran a 4.3/4.4 and has freakish agility. Him being 5'8 200 pounds doesn't stop him from being athletic. Wes Welker is also athletic, he has the skillset similar to Brian Westbrook, very quick like a bunny rabbit and runs routes similar to what a rb runs, he has a great initial burst from 0 to 20 yards, he just lacks top end speed in the 40. Westbrook is similar, only three rushes over 40 yards in his entire career. Jim Leonhard could dunk a basketball in high school as a freshman. He was timed numerous times by the Wisconsin coach in the 4.4 range because the coach didn't believe it. The 40 he ran at his pro day was on a bum ankle. Did you watch Fletcher play back in the day? Dude was explosive. Dexter? the same thing.

Being undersized for your position does not stop a player from being a freak athlete. Do you think average athletes who lack size could make it in the NFL if they just worked hard enough? For every walk on/small school success story there are literally 100's of guys who worked just as hard and didn't make it. Go look up Nate Kmic who broke Woodhead's record.

You are right we do lose players to other sports, but plenty still choose football. Leonhard couldve gotten a nice baseball scholarship but chose to walk on to Wisconsin in football. Riley Cooper, Eric Decker were both drafted into baseball. Demps and Holliday could've had nice track careers but they chose football as well. The only thing limiting the NFL is that football is limited to only America. Who knows what kind of athletes we could get if they had something on a similar level in other countries. I know their are amateur European teams but just like the best athletes tend to choose football here, the best athletes tend to choose soccer over there. There was an NFL lineman that went over to Germany to coach, said it was basically on a pee wee level, the coaching/training etc. Its not the same like with the NBA when they grab the best European players.

EricCartmann
07-10-2011, 12:34 PM
Dude, just add him to your ignore list. It has made my life infinitely more pleasant on this site.

That's because you do not want to have any discussions. You just want to close your ears and have others listen when you blurt out your words.

On top of all that, you then put my name in your sig ahhahahaaahha. Do my discussions really bug you that much? I don't blame you though, it sucks to find out that Santa Clause is not real!

If FunBuncher would have read this entire thread, he would know I basically take the same view Funbuncher he does, that both ARod and Tiger are freaks of nature.

EricCartmann
07-10-2011, 12:50 PM
So what??

A Rod was one of the most physically gifted baseball prospects since Mickey Mantle, but his admission that he used steroids may keep him out of Cooperstown.

If it's ever officially confirmed that Tiger Woods did HGH or worse, I don't care if he wins 50 majors, he'll never be considered one of the greats in his sport.

What's funny is BOTH these guys didn't even need to take crap to be great.
All they had to do is stay in shape and work out hard.

But they got greedy, didn't believe in their talent and became insecure in their ability to work hard NATURALLY to achieve a goal.

Tiger punked out, allegedly.

A Rod definitely punked out.

Because too many pro athletes use juice doesn't mean it's acceptable or should be condoned.

Check what you're arguing in favor of, Cartmann.

You sound like a Wall Street bankster.


Santa Clause is not REAL!

I like you believe Tiger and A-Rod are great athletes. Unlike you, I do not have the fortune teller abilities to know how well they would do with or without illegal PEDs. I don't think these guys would take PEDs to make them worse, so I am going to lean on the side that they took them to hit the ball further.

I did not create this world world, and I certainly have no influence the direction it goes, does not matter what side I think. All I am is an outside observer telling you how it works. These athletes will continue to do things the way they do, and it does not matter I believe.

I do not know where you get the idea that I condone cheating. I do know that I have no place in telling the NFL/NFLPA/PGA/MLB-PA to perform a witch hunt. I will let the league and players determine that.

Right now I don't see a lot of players demanding stricter drug testing, so I am going to assume 1 of 2 things:
1) they are all taking it
2) they just don't care.

I think it might be a combination of the 2. 99% of it is genetics anyways, and these guys at the top levels are truly the best. Someone like me will never come close no matter how much PEDs I take.

EricCartmann
07-10-2011, 12:54 PM
Danny Woodhead is an athletic freak, he ran a 4.3/4.4 and has freakish agility. Him being 5'8 200 pounds doesn't stop him from being athletic. Wes Welker is also athletic, he has the skillset similar to Brian Westbrook, very quick like a bunny rabbit and runs routes similar to what a rb runs, he has a great initial burst from 0 to 20 yards, he just lacks top end speed in the 40. Westbrook is similar, only three rushes over 40 yards in his entire career. Jim Leonhard could dunk a basketball in high school as a freshman. He was timed numerous times by the Wisconsin coach in the 4.4 range because the coach didn't believe it. The 40 he ran at his pro day was on a bum ankle. Did you watch Fletcher play back in the day? Dude was explosive. Dexter? the same thing.

Being undersized for your position does not stop a player from being a freak athlete. Do you think average athletes who lack size could make it in the NFL if they just worked hard enough? For every walk on/small school success story there are literally 100's of guys who worked just as hard and didn't make it. Go look up Nate Kmic who broke Woodhead's record.

You are right we do lose players to other sports, but plenty still choose football. Leonhard couldve gotten a nice baseball scholarship but chose to walk on to Wisconsin in football. Riley Cooper, Eric Decker were both drafted into baseball. Demps and Holliday could've had nice track careers but they chose football as well. The only thing limiting the NFL is that football is limited to only America. Who knows what kind of athletes we could get if they had something on a similar level in other countries. I know their are amateur European teams but just like the best athletes tend to choose football here, the best athletes tend to choose soccer over there. There was an NFL lineman that went over to Germany to coach, said it was basically on a pee wee level, the coaching/training etc. Its not the same like with the NBA when they grab the best European players.


Are you saying Woodhead is a freak of nature? That not all of us can be like him no matter how hard we work? Jack1077 is going to be mad!!!!

A Jack1077 divided against itself cannot stand!

EricCartmann
07-10-2011, 01:02 PM
FYI: We are 1/10th of the way to page 100.

FUNBUNCHER
07-10-2011, 01:09 PM
It's not about a witch hunt. It's about enforcing the RULES.

No one EVER catches all the cheaters, that's why they are CHEATERS.

HS teachers don't catch every student who steals the answers for a test, the police don't catch every criminal.

That's the world, yes, but it doesn't mean you conform to the worst aspects of human nature.

The upside of catching guys like Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Marion Jones, Lance Armstrong, etc., is that it serves as a deterrent for the athletes who follow them.

Yes, PEDs may make you a superstar and wealthy beyond imagination, but IF you get caught, the damage to that athlete's rep may never be salvaged.

Looks at Clemens, he would have been a MLB HOFer if he'd retired in his mid-30s, but instead he went on the gear and had one of his most statistically dominant seasons at age 42.

Now his entire professional resume is under scrutiny and being discredited, despite common sense that tells us he didn't use his entire career.

I was told a long time ago the ONLY thing a man has in this life is his NAME.
What is it that people say about you when you're not in the room??

Most pro athletes care about their 'names', their reputations, their legacy.

Getting caught taking steroids robs them of that FOREVER.

EricCartmann
07-10-2011, 01:44 PM
It's not about a witch hunt. It's about enforcing the RULES.

No one EVER catches all the cheaters, that's why they are CHEATERS.

HS teachers don't catch every student who steals the answers for a test, the police don't catch every criminal.


Are you saying that athletes at the top levels that uses PEDs, such as Clemons, A-Rod, and Tiger are on the same level as Child-Molestors and Murderers?

I can't believe you are organizing a witch-hunt and you do not even know you are doing it.

What is there to catch? Are you going to enforce the rules? What are the rules? Have you ever thought that maybe they found ways to get around the rules? And that all of them are getting around the rules? Are the rule-makers also involved? So many questions, but all I know is if the players and leagues do not do a better job of enforcing "the rules", then it is their business not mine.

I don't feel PED users affect my life, and I don't put them on the same level as child-molestors.. so like I said, it's their business, not mine.



That's the world, yes, but it doesn't mean you conform to the worst aspects of human nature.

The upside of catching guys like Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Marion Jones, Lance Armstrong, etc., is that it serves as a deterrent for the athletes who follow them.


PED users are the worse aspect of human nature? I don't agree with this, and like I said, it's their (the league and players) business, not mine.



Yes, PEDs may make you a superstar and wealthy beyond imagination, but IF you get caught, the damage to that athlete's rep may never be salvaged.

Looks at Clemens, he would have been a MLB HOFer if he'd retired in his mid-30s, but instead he went on the gear and had one of his most statistically dominant seasons at age 42.

Now his entire professional resume is under scrutiny and being discredited, despite common sense that tells us he didn't use his entire career.

I was told a long time ago the ONLY thing a man has in this life is his NAME.
What is it that people say about you when you're not in the room??

Most pro athletes care about their 'names', their reputations, their legacy.

Getting caught taking steroids robs them of that FOREVER.

I am so happy to have you here to save US from US. Preaching to us right and wrong, as if your words are going to have an impact. All I got to say is keep on going brother! You have to do, and believe whatever it is so you can get a good nights rest, because that is what's most important.

FUNBUNCHER
07-10-2011, 02:35 PM
Any person who commits a crime is the equivalent of a child-molester or murderer??
Is that what you said, Eric??
'Cause I know I didn't.

There's a reason why many posters on this site thought you hadn't reached puberty yet, because you argue like a middle schooler.

I'll make this simple(again), PEDs give a competitive athlete an unfair advantage over a non-using opponent.

It would sort of like playing a game of football where one team wears facemasks and one team doesn't.

PED use is against the rules in EVERY major pro sport, NCAA sport and the Olympics.

It's impossible to catch every cheater, which doesn't mean you don't try.

A 'witch hunt' implies you're looking for something that doesn't exist.
PEDs are very much real, as are their demonstrated effects and ability to distort performance in competitive sports.

If you don't care, why do you keep posting??

There are guys on SWDC who are PED 'agnostics'; they think using PEDs in sports is wrong and don't know if PEDs are being used by pro athletes, but if there are, it's beyond their awareness to know to what degree they're being abused so they don't waste their time thinking about it.

You on the other hand Eric, DO CARE. You're a PED apologist and sympathizer, which also is fine btw.

But it's still cheating and I prefer the NFL etc. has a stated zero tolerance policy, even if it's not really that effective.

EricCartmann
07-10-2011, 03:08 PM
Any person who commits a crime is the equivalent of a child-molester or murderer??
Is that what you said, Eric??
'Cause I know I didn't.

You said Police don't catch every criminal. Are PED users criminals?



There's a reason why many posters on this site thought you hadn't reached puberty yet, because you argue like a middle schooler.


Is it because a middle schooler asks too many questions you can't answer?



I'll make this simple(again), PEDs give a competitive athlete an unfair advantage over a non-using opponent.

It would sort of like playing a game of football where one team wears facemasks and one team doesn't.


I don't know about you, but if everyone is wearing facemasks, and facemasks are legal, I would most likely wear one too.

Yes I am aware of that PEDs give you an unfair advantage. The NFL has a drug enforcement policy in place. There is also an NFL players association that can demand stricter testing or stricter enforcement. Me as a middle schooler am just going to butt out. But I see you being a higher member of society feel it is your duty to butt in and tell them what to do?



PED use is against the rules in EVERY major pro sport, NCAA sport and the Olympics.

It's impossible to catch every cheater, which doesn't mean you don't try.


The NFL is trying. Are you saying you are still not pleased? And you want to be part of the witch hunt?



A 'witch hunt' implies you're looking for something that doesn't exist.
PEDs are very much real, as are their demonstrated effects and ability to distort performance in competitive sports.


How do you know witches are not real? Also... a witch hunt does not necessarily mean you are searching for something that is not real, it also implies you are looking for people to persecute, even though you do not know what you are looking for. Also you do not care if they are innocent or guilty.



If you don't care, why do you keep posting??

There are guys on SWDC who are PED 'agnostics'; they think using PEDs in sports is wrong and don't know if PEDs are being used by pro athletes, but if there are, it's beyond their awareness to know to what degree they're being abused so they don't waste their time thinking about it.


For the record, I do care! Now I may not care how the NFL or MLB handles this. I also do not care for the witch hunt, I do not know enough about what is a legal-PED or illegal-PED to organize a hunt.



You on the other hand Eric, DO CARE. You're a PED apologist and sympathizer, which also is fine btw.

But it's still cheating and I prefer the NFL etc. has a stated zero tolerance policy, even if it's not really that effective.

Your right, I do care. I am not one to easily join a mob. Just because you joined the MOB and ready to put Tiger, Lance, and A-Rod on the stake, don't expect me to. Is that OK if I do not join the Mob?

jack1077
07-10-2011, 03:10 PM
Danny Woodhead is an athletic freak, he ran a 4.3/4.4 and has freakish agility. Him being 5'8 200 pounds doesn't stop him from being athletic. Wes Welker is also athletic, he has the skillset similar to Brian Westbrook, very quick like a bunny rabbit and runs routes similar to what a rb runs, he has a great initial burst from 0 to 20 yards, he just lacks top end speed in the 40. Westbrook is similar, only three rushes over 40 yards in his entire career. Jim Leonhard could dunk a basketball in high school as a freshman. He was timed numerous times by the Wisconsin coach in the 4.4 range because the coach didn't believe it. The 40 he ran at his pro day was on a bum ankle. Did you watch Fletcher play back in the day? Dude was explosive. Dexter? the same thing.

Being undersized for your position does not stop a player from being a freak athlete. Do you think average athletes who lack size could make it in the NFL if they just worked hard enough? For every walk on/small school success story there are literally 100's of guys who worked just as hard and didn't make it. Go look up Nate Kmic who broke Woodhead's record.

You are right we do lose players to other sports, but plenty still choose football. Leonhard couldve gotten a nice baseball scholarship but chose to walk on to Wisconsin in football. Riley Cooper, Eric Decker were both drafted into baseball. Demps and Holliday could've had nice track careers but they chose football as well. The only thing limiting the NFL is that football is limited to only America. Who knows what kind of athletes we could get if they had something on a similar level in other countries. I know their are amateur European teams but just like the best athletes tend to choose football here, the best athletes tend to choose soccer over there. There was an NFL lineman that went over to Germany to coach, said it was basically on a pee wee level, the coaching/training etc. Its not the same like with the NBA when they grab the best European players.

This is what Eric does not seem to understand. How many pro sports men are there in the world? Too many to count. You have rugby, rugby league, Australian rules football, track, swimming, baseball, soccer, basketball, curling, gaelic football and thouseands more sports all played internationally. Eric seems to think that all people want to be NFL players. There are also a huge number of people great at athletics who choose a different path. Unless every man in the world is aiming to be an NFL player, his 'statistic' argument doesn't make any sense.

EricCartmann
07-10-2011, 03:31 PM
This is what Eric does not seem to understand. How many pro sports men are there in the world? Too many to count. You have rugby, rugby league, Australian rules football, track, swimming, baseball, soccer, basketball, curling, gaelic football and thouseands more sports all played internationally. Eric seems to think that all people want to be NFL players. There are also a huge number of people great at athletics who choose a different path. Unless every man in the world is aiming to be an NFL player, his 'statistic' argument doesn't make any sense.

Do you not see I worked the numbers way way way in your favor?

How many alumni from your High School that went on to play pro sports at any level? How many even went on to play Division College?

In a class of 100 graduating males, if you have 2 genetically gifted enough to play pro sports at any level, that is already 98%. I highly doubt the average HS has 2 out of a 100 that are genetically gifted enough to play pro sports at any level. It's probably more like 2 out of 1000.

But regardless if the real number is 2 out of 1000, I will say 2 out of 100 to keep it at 98% for your sake.

Your Welcome,

Your friend and buddy EricCartmann

EricCartmann
07-10-2011, 07:31 PM
Jack1077,

Since you want to use the world population and not just the USA, as your friend and buddy I have no problems with that.

As your friend and buddy I also used some of my math I learned in the 4th grade and collected some stats for you.

- According to UN, Earth has 6.78 Billion people
- According to UN, there are about 3.4 Billion males in the world
- According to the NFL, the Total number of NFL players is 1856 (53 in roster + 5 for practice squad)
- According to NFLPA, the Average career of NFL Players is 3.3 years
- According to Wiki, the Average age of a Male in the World is 67 years old
- 67 years divided by 3.3 years = 20 NFL-generations of current-players, future-players, and former-players currently alive today (1 gen = 3.3 years)
- That means there are about 37,120 people alive today that use to be, that are, or that will be NFL-football players.
- 3,400,000,000 (total male population) divided by 37,120 (all NFL players, past, future, and present) = 91,596
- This 91,596 represents the number of people that exists for every NFL player-past-current-future.
- 1 in 91,596 equals about .0000192 or .00192%.

- Lets say that for every person that makes it in the NFL, there are 1000 behind him that has the physical attributes to make it to the NFL, but for whatever reason they did not, reasons such as they got married, were lazy, chose another sport, their mom would not let them play, etc., etc.

- So if we take 37,120 and multiply that by 1000, we get 37.12 million.

- Take 37,120,00 and divide that by 3,400,000,000 we get .0019 or 1.09%!!

- That is saying that 99.01 % of the population is not athletically gifted enought to play NFL.

- So would you not agree I am not exaggerating when I say 99% of it is genetics?

- Keep in mind I am being very very GENEROUS when I say 99%! Do you really believe that for every ONE guy that does make it to the NFL, there are 1000 capable athletes in the world that are just as capable??? You really think there are 1000 for every 1???? I myself think it's more like ONE for every 50.

But because I am your friend and buddy, and I want you to feel good about yourself, that is why I am using the 1000 number.

Onto Page 100!

FUNBUNCHER
07-10-2011, 07:56 PM
I still think that number is low.
And how did you get to 37120??

EricCartmann
07-10-2011, 08:27 PM
I still think that number is low.
And how did you get to 37120??

Good question!

- There are 1,856 NFL players at the moment.
- Wiki says the average world lifespan is 67 years old
- NFLPA says the average career for an NFL Player is 3.3 years.
- 67years divided by 3.3years= about 20 generations of NFL players in an average lifepan.
- 1,856 multiply by 20 = 37,120 that once played, currently playing, and players that will play.

I am way over estimating all in your favor.

EricCartmann
07-10-2011, 08:30 PM
I still think that number is low.
And how did you get to 37120??

So you think 1 out of every 100 is low? Really? Meaning for every 100 guys you randomly meet, that more 1 is genetically gifted enough to play in the NFL?

What high school did you go to? I would love to see your alumni class!

EricCartmann
07-10-2011, 08:31 PM
I am hoping to lose my rookie title by the end of the night.

EricCartmann
07-11-2011, 12:31 AM
I am on your side Funbuncher and Jack1077. I want you guys to prove that Idiot EricCartmann wrong.

How about we evaluate 1 high school's alumni class? Not just any high school but the best in California when it comes to athletics. De La Salle!! A High School known as a Factory for athletics!

Since 1990 this school has produced 17 athletes that played at the Pro Level.

This school also graduates about 250 students a year, 1990-2010 = 20 years.

250 students over 20 years = 5000 students total. 17/5000 = 0.3%. Not 3% mind you, but 0.3% made it to the pro level! Only 0.3% made it to the very top levels! Keep in mind I am counting Pro Soccer Players too, and some would not consider Pro Soccer a Sport =)

For those of you that don't know, De La Salle is a Catholic School known for their work ethic. Of the 5-10 athletes that De La Salle sends to Division College Each year on an Athletic Scholarship, less then one will go on to compete at the Pro Level.

----------------------------------------

De La Salle Pro Alumni:
T.J. Ward Safety for the Cleveland Browns
Maurice Jones-Drew Halfback for Jacksonville Jaguars.
Amani Toomer Wide Receiver for New York Giants
Kevin Simon Linebacker for Washington Redskins
Matt Gutierrez Quarterback with Kansas City Chiefs
Jackie Bates Cornerback with the Kansas City Chiefs
D. J. Williams Outside Linebacker with Denver Broncos
Doug Brien Kicker with San Francisco 49ers
David Loverne Guard with New York Jets
Derek Landri Defensive tackle with Carolina Panthers
Stephen Wondolowski Pro Soccer player
Chris Wondolowski Pro Soccer player
Stefan Frei Pro Soccer player
John David Baker Pro Baseball player
Chris Carter Pro Baseball player
Jon Barry Pro Basketball player
Brent Barry Pro Basketball player

Link Here for reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_La_Salle_High_School_%28Concord,_California%29

stlouisfan37
07-13-2011, 06:09 AM
One of the first Super Bowls I remember watching as a kid was Super Bowl 14 between the Steelers and Rams. My Rams had finally made it and I was glued to the TV set even though we lost.

I remember the commentator talking about how the Steelers had been the first to instill weight training with their players, and other teams were starting to do the same. Players would become bigger and faster, they said.

Sure enough, players have become bigger and faster. That much is obvious. However, being that kid who always had a million questions, I recently pondered just HOW MUCH bigger and faster they have gotten since then. My research is quite startling.

The starting quarterback for the Steelers was Terry Bradshaw, who was 6'3" and weighed 215. He was considered a big, strong qb in his day, and durable because of it. In this year's draft, the smallest qb taken was Andy Dalton of TCU, who is 6'2" and 215.

Rich Saul was the starting center for the Rams at 6'3" and 241. In this year's draft there were only 5 offensive linemen drafted that weigh under 300 pounds. All of them carry the stigma that they need to "beef up" in order to handle the bull rush. In comparison, Cam Newton, this year's first QB taken, is 6'5" and 248, and ran the 40 in the high 4.5's.

Franco Harris was the starting running back for the Steelers. At 6'2" and 230, he was exceptionally quick for his size and really had the body of a fullback. In comparison, this year's draft yielded 9 backs weighing over 220 pounds; 6 of them ran the 40 in under 4.6.

John Stallworth was the biggest receiver in the game at 6'2" and 191 pounds. This year's draft produced nine receivers that are as tall or taller, and 21 that are heavier. Of those that outweigh him, 8 ran the 40 in under 4.5 seconds.

Defensively it is the same. Super Bowl XIV's biggest defensive tackle was Joe Greene, who was 6'4" and 275. No other defender in the game even weighed 260. The smallest defensive tackle in this year's draft was Nick Fairly, at 6'1" and 291. Most are 300+. Ends that are under 265 pounds are generally converted into 3-4 outside linebackers. The Rams' bookends, Jack Youngblood and Fred Dryer, both weighed in around 245.

Linebackers varied a little less. Jack Lambert was around 220, but most were in the 225-230 range. Jim Youngblood was the heavyweight in the game at 235. There were 6 linebackers weighing under 230 in this draft, but they were all taken in the later rounds. Most rookie linebackers today are between 240 and 260 pounds.

Mel Blount was considered to be an elite cornerback in his day. He was huge for a corner; 6'3" and 205 pounds, and had the speed and athleticism to cover any receiver in the game. It was an absolute rarity for a player his size to have that kind of speed and agility, and he was a first ballot Hall of Famer. This year's draft brought the league 14 cornerbacks weighing over 200 pounds. Of the 10 that ran at the combine, their average 40 time was a blazing 4.47 seconds; three ran it in under 4.4.

The truly amazing part to me is the fact that the two teams I studied were veteran teams, with most of their players being between 25-32 years old and in their physical prime. Thirty years later there are hundreds of 22 year olds that are so far beyond them physically that I find it hard to believe there is not a high amount of performance enhancement going on.

stlouisfan37
07-13-2011, 06:14 AM
Do you have to cut your numbers in half or double them to take into account that thus far there have been no women who have made it in the NFL?

EricCartmann
07-14-2011, 01:20 AM
Do you have to cut your numbers in half or double them to take into account that thus far there have been no women who have made it in the NFL?

are you really that stupid? I only counted men in my numbers. Also De La Salle is a all boy school.

I never checked under their pants though.. so are you telling me that everyone in De La Salle might not have a ***** even though the advertise as an all boys school?

EricCartmann
07-14-2011, 01:31 AM
One of the first Super Bowls I remember watching as a kid was Super Bowl 14 between the Steelers and Rams. My Rams had finally made it and I was glued to the TV set even though we lost.

I remember the commentator talking about how the Steelers had been the first to instill weight training with their players, and other teams were starting to do the same. Players would become bigger and faster, they said.

Sure enough, players have become bigger and faster. That much is obvious. However, being that kid who always had a million questions, I recently pondered just HOW MUCH bigger and faster they have gotten since then. My research is quite startling.

The starting quarterback for the Steelers was Terry Bradshaw, who was 6'3" and weighed 215. He was considered a big, strong qb in his day, and durable because of it. In this year's draft, the smallest qb taken was Andy Dalton of TCU, who is 6'2" and 215.

Rich Saul was the starting center for the Rams at 6'3" and 241. In this year's draft there were only 5 offensive linemen drafted that weigh under 300 pounds. All of them carry the stigma that they need to "beef up" in order to handle the bull rush. In comparison, Cam Newton, this year's first QB taken, is 6'5" and 248, and ran the 40 in the high 4.5's.

Franco Harris was the starting running back for the Steelers. At 6'2" and 230, he was exceptionally quick for his size and really had the body of a fullback. In comparison, this year's draft yielded 9 backs weighing over 220 pounds; 6 of them ran the 40 in under 4.6.

John Stallworth was the biggest receiver in the game at 6'2" and 191 pounds. This year's draft produced nine receivers that are as tall or taller, and 21 that are heavier. Of those that outweigh him, 8 ran the 40 in under 4.5 seconds.

Defensively it is the same. Super Bowl XIV's biggest defensive tackle was Joe Greene, who was 6'4" and 275. No other defender in the game even weighed 260. The smallest defensive tackle in this year's draft was Nick Fairly, at 6'1" and 291. Most are 300+. Ends that are under 265 pounds are generally converted into 3-4 outside linebackers. The Rams' bookends, Jack Youngblood and Fred Dryer, both weighed in around 245.

Linebackers varied a little less. Jack Lambert was around 220, but most were in the 225-230 range. Jim Youngblood was the heavyweight in the game at 235. There were 6 linebackers weighing under 230 in this draft, but they were all taken in the later rounds. Most rookie linebackers today are between 240 and 260 pounds.

Mel Blount was considered to be an elite cornerback in his day. He was huge for a corner; 6'3" and 205 pounds, and had the speed and athleticism to cover any receiver in the game. It was an absolute rarity for a player his size to have that kind of speed and agility, and he was a first ballot Hall of Famer. This year's draft brought the league 14 cornerbacks weighing over 200 pounds. Of the 10 that ran at the combine, their average 40 time was a blazing 4.47 seconds; three ran it in under 4.4.

The truly amazing part to me is the fact that the two teams I studied were veteran teams, with most of their players being between 25-32 years old and in their physical prime. Thirty years later there are hundreds of 22 year olds that are so far beyond them physically that I find it hard to believe there is not a high amount of performance enhancement going on.


Though what you say sides with me that everyone dopes, I am going to have to disagree 40%. Reason? Just take the general population.. general population is hard to track, but the Army did track it, in WW2 the average Enlisted Soldier was 5'8". In the Gulf War in 1990 it was said that the average was close to 5'10".. and I am sure the average soldier did not take PEDs. Basically what I am saying is a lot is done naturally.. however I do agree there is some "Enhancement" going on too... that is why I only disagree with you 40% and not 100%.

FUNBUNCHER
07-14-2011, 03:19 AM
I don't think stlouisfan37 was making a direct comment about the evolution of PE usage in the NFL, only that over 30 years NFL players have exploded in terms of their size, strength and speed.

Some of that's directly related to scientific strength and weight training programs incorporated by most NFL and college teams, along with advances in sports nutrition. In the 1970s and 1980s I don't think 'macronutrients' was even a term, or the belief that a hard training athlete NEEDED to eat in excess of 4000-6000 calories A DAY divided over several meals to maintain and improve his overall size and strength.

Much of these innovations we presently see in the NFL came from the world of Olympic track and field training the speed work; specific ballistic movements, plyometrics, etc. Football players in the late 1980s all began to lift like world class discus and other implement track athletes, doing more power cleans, squats, interval/crosstraining, improving core strength and flexibility.

IMO when NCAA and NFL strength coaches began to study how the Russians and Bulgarians routinely produced 250-270#,6'2 - 6'6 shot putters and javelin throwers who were explosive enough through their hips to dunk a basketball, they simply applied those techniques to offseason football training.

This accounts for much of the evolution in the sport over the last 30+ years, but many suspect there's another 'scientific' component that unfortunately isn't discussed in public.

A 300# lineman back in the day used to be code for a fatass, with The Fridge being a perfect example of a sloppy POS 300+# NFL player. THree hundred pounders nowadays are big, strong, athletic, quick AND relatively lean compared to their predecessors.
Guys like Joe Thomas and Jake Long look like TEs in shorts with their shirts off.

IMO for more kids football is their first choice for a sport, which means there's a greater random chance for better athletes to gravitate to the sport.

But on some level, many current football athletes are relying on 'training methods' to 'bulk up' that football players of previous generations had no knowledge of.

My thing with steroids is, most guys in football who use it KNOW they can't be habitual about it like bodybuilders, but they can go on a 6 to eight week cycle to gain an inordinate amount a raw muscle mass, come off the juice and maintain 60-75% of their weight gain with a proper diet and training.

I think A LOT of NFL and college players have done this and continue to do so.
Does taking juice make someone a GREAT football player??
No.

But it does make the game bigger/faster/stronger.

stlouisfan37
07-14-2011, 02:41 PM
Though what you say sides with me that everyone dopes, I am going to have to disagree 40%. Reason? Just take the general population.. general population is hard to track, but the Army did track it, in WW2 the average Enlisted Soldier was 5'8". In the Gulf War in 1990 it was said that the average was close to 5'10".. and I am sure the average soldier did not take PEDs. Basically what I am saying is a lot is done naturally.. however I do agree there is some "Enhancement" going on too... that is why I only disagree with you 40% and not 100%.

It was not my intention here to try to prove or disprove the use of PEDs in any way. It was merely to show the true numbers on how much the modern athlete has grown physically.

Personally I think the proof is in the pudding when you see an elite player get busted, like Shawne Merriman or Brian Cushing. Neither has come close to their form before they got caught. Merriman had the knee injury, but that has been some time ago now. I don't think there are many people out there that think either of those two guys got to the top by playing fair.

EricCartmann
07-14-2011, 04:32 PM
It was not my intention here to try to prove or disprove the use of PEDs in any way. It was merely to show the true numbers on how much the modern athlete has grown physically.

Personally I think the proof is in the pudding when you see an elite player get busted, like Shawne Merriman or Brian Cushing. Neither has come close to their form before they got caught. Merriman had the knee injury, but that has been some time ago now. I don't think there are many people out there that think either of those two guys got to the top by playing fair.


The evidence is pretty damning

stlouisfan37
07-15-2011, 11:57 AM
The evidence is pretty damning

Yes, I agree. Even as late as the mid-80's there were starting interior linemen playing under 250 pounds. I think you would be hard pressed to find a Division I lineman that small today.

I remember a star linebacker from the 80's named Chip Banks. He had his best years with the Cleveland Browns. He got bigger later in his career, and the reference manuals show him in the 240 range, but his saying back in the day was, "I'm mean, lean, and 215." How many times in the last decade have we seen a star linebacker come out of college with a playing weight in the 220's and the scouts are trying to determine if he has the frame to add 15 pounds or the quickness to move to safety, because it is absolutely out of the question for him to play linebacker that small?