Does the NFL really care about performance enhancing drugs?

[LesBaker]

I completely understand your thought process and can't even say I disagree. The only 2 things is like to add are

1) I do think your feelings towards baseball are a little old fashioned (meant with no offense whatsoever) and that the average fan doesn't care nearly as much about the mystique and all. Look at Yankee stadium, a lot of it (especially the expensive seats) are filled up by corporate clients who want to see the ball go 500 feet.

2) I think you're also over exaggerating the affect of PEDs. They don't make "average" joes break all time records. They obviously help a great deal and turn some fly balls to home runs but what experts say it helps more than anything is confidence. These guys are already very good at what they do.

I'm not saying it's a good thing just that it really doesn't bother me. If they didn't blow up this Major League Baseball issue with congress and all most wouldn't even be aware of it and attendance was at an all time high during the McGuire Sosa battles, or bonds going nuts ....just food for thought

I've never been able to wrap my head around the hysteria that Bonds generated when everyone on the planet KNEW he was cheating. Everyone! Yet so many people weren't bothered about him breaking a nearly sacred record, not just in baseball but all American sport. Aaron had to be sick doing that video congratulating Bonds.

When Sosa and McGuire were smashing home runs a lot of people suspected but it was not for certain, everyone wondered but wasn't sure. Bonds we KNEW was cheating and I can't look past that. And the fact that he let a guy sit in jail for a year and a half or whatever to protect his own ass just made me sick.

It's easy to look at this and wonder what you or I would do, but harder to actually answer that easy to ask question. I don't think I would because the idea of sportsmanship matters to me.

 

[Lunchbox]

I understand that I may be in the minority on this issue and part of that is probably a generational thing.

1) No offense taken at the old-fashioned comment, I am and I'm comfortable with that, even a little proud of it. Personally I don't care who sits in the expensive seats, luxury boxes or anywhere else. I'm fine with the bleachers and I like a 500 foot home run too, just prefer it to be off the bat of a clean player dedicated to his craft and doing things the "right" way.

2) You're right, using "average joe" as an example was an exaggeration. It came to mind because of the Sosa/McGuire race and I'd always felt Sosa was an average to slightly above average player by professional standards.

I think congress got involved because the issue had already blown up. Sosa in particular had no business vying for a single season home run record.
Clemens, who would have been an all-time great without the use of PED's was an especially sad case of a player who couldn't let go once age started creeping in. His repeated comebacks raised enough suspicion in my eyes that I wasn't surprised when allegations of PED use became public.
Bonds went from an incredibly athletic player to an absolute monster. He didn't help himself much by being a fairly unlikeable character to begin with and eclipsing Hank Aaron's record was certain to bring a backlash along with it.

Maybe all these cases became issues because of old-fashioned folks like me who didn't like seeing their one-time heroes relegated to second place by cheaters. I also felt this way after the taping allegations came out against the Pats after losing to them in the Super Bowl.

The pursuit of records like these are incredibly exciting and are sure to bring lots of fans in to witness history being made. It's a shame that history will forever carry an asterisk in the minds of many as a drug-aided aberration (including the commish).

 

[LesBaker]

I understand that I may be in the minority on this issue and part of that is probably a generational thing.

1) No offense taken at the old-fashioned comment, I am and I'm comfortable with that, even a little proud of it. Personally I don't care who sits in the expensive seats, luxury boxes or anywhere else. I'm fine with the bleachers and I like a 500 foot home run too, just prefer it to be off the bat of a clean player dedicated to his craft and doing things the "right" way.

2) You're right, using "average joe" as an example was an exaggeration. It came to mind because of the Sosa/McGuire race and I'd always felt Sosa was an average to slightly above average player by professional standards.

I think congress got involved because the issue had already blown up. Sosa in particular had no business vying for a single season home run record.
Clemens, who would have been an all-time great without the use of PED's was an especially sad case of a player who couldn't let go once age started creeping in. His repeated comebacks raised enough suspicion in my eyes that I wasn't surprised when allegations of PED use became public.
Bonds went from an incredibly athletic player to an absolute monster. He didn't help himself much by being a fairly unlikeable character to begin with and eclipsing Hank Aaron's record was certain to bring a backlash along with it.

Maybe all these cases became issues because of old-fashioned folks like me who didn't like seeing their one-time heroes relegated to second place by cheaters. I also felt this way after the taping allegations came out against the Pats after losing to them in the Super Bowl.

The pursuit of records like these are incredibly exciting and are sure to bring lots of fans in to witness history being made. It's a shame that history will forever carry an asterisk in the minds of many as a drug-aided aberration (including the commish).

It's not just old fashioned guys and sports writers, lots of young fans don't like it either. I think it has more to do with the level of "fanhood". Maybe I'm wrong but die hard fans of a sport, especially baseball, are less likely to be OK with this type of thing than a more casual or totally casual fan would be. I don't know if its only age, that of course factors in but I think it takes a backseat to the "fanhood" thing. I dunno, that's what I've always thought.

 

[NJRamsFan]

It's not just old fashioned guys and sports writers, lots of young fans don't like it either. I think it has more to do with the level of "fanhood". Maybe I'm wrong but die hard fans of a sport, especially baseball, are less likely to be OK with this type of thing than a more casual or totally casual fan would be. I don't know if its only age, that of course factors in but I think it takes a backseat to the "fanhood" thing. I dunno, that's what I've always thought.

Baseball was always my first love to play I played from when I was 5 yrs old till a sophomore in college before partially tearing 2 ligaments in my elbow and being forced to stop. There were always guys I knew were juicing from as earily as high school...never bothered me. Hitting a 90+ mph round baseball with a round bat is one of the hardest things to do in sports. steroids don't make you hit the ball, maybe further. But if you're making solid contact off Felix Hernandez you're an exceptional baseball player period.

 

[fearsomefour]

Baseball was always my first love to play I played from when I was 5 yrs old till a sophomore in college before partially tearing 2 ligaments in my elbow and being forced to stop. There were always guys I knew were juicing from as earily as high school...never bothered me. Hitting a 90+ mph round baseball with a round bat is one of the hardest things to do in sports. steroids don't make you hit the ball, maybe further. But if you're making solid contact off Felix Hernandez you're an exceptional baseball player period.

True.
Juice was used a lot in baseball for recovery. Someone like Clemons was not throwing how he threw because of the juice.
I think everyone would prefer the players were clean but that just isent reality. Never has been never will be. Any professional sport is a hyper competitive atmosphere where injuries are a constant.
I think baseball lends itself to PED use because of the length of the season and the fact that a player has to ascend through at least four levels of minor league ball,sometimes more, to make the majors.
Laser eye surgery, legal supplements, HGH, blood cycling, steroids, prescription drugs, pain medication....all variations on the same thing. All performance enhancers and all going on in different forms forever.
The societal mindset (bought into marketing) that sees something like weed as a "drug" and an addictive synthetic damaging pain pill as "medicine" is beyond reason to me.
Just my thoughts.

 

[Lunchbox]

Baseball was always my first love to play I played from when I was 5 yrs old till a sophomore in college before partially tearing 2 ligaments in my elbow and being forced to stop. There were always guys I knew were juicing from as earily as high school...never bothered me. Hitting a 90+ mph round baseball with a round bat is one of the hardest things to do in sports. steroids don't make you hit the ball, maybe further. But if you're making solid contact off Felix Hernandez you're an exceptional baseball player period.

Agree with Les that I should have left out the generational reference. Plenty of examples right on this forum of guys of all ages with good values and juicing is not exactly a new phenomenon. I guess I equate my dislike of PED use as somewhat old-fashioned because of my age.

Also agree with you that skill can't be provided by a drug but the kind of focused aggression and strength that some provide can give a skilled player an unnatural ability to break records that he would not otherwise have the ability to break. I guess my biggest beef is that the relative sophistication of PED's provides a much greater edge than at any other time in the history of sports. IMO that carries with it a greater responsibility (to the integrity of the game) by players that use them than a player who in the past may have used "greenies" to get himself "up" for a game.

 

[Lunchbox]

True.
Juice was used a lot in baseball for recovery. Someone like Clemons was not throwing how he threw because of the juice.
I think everyone would prefer the players were clean but that just isent reality. Never has been never will be. Any professional sport is a hyper competitive atmosphere where injuries are a constant.
I think baseball lends itself to PED use because of the length of the season and the fact that a player has to ascend through at least four levels of minor league ball,sometimes more, to make the majors.
Laser eye surgery, legal supplements, HGH, blood cycling, steroids, prescription drugs, pain medication....all variations on the same thing. All performance enhancers and all going on in different forms forever.
The societal mindset (bought into marketing) that sees something like weed as a "drug" and an addictive synthetic damaging pain pill as "medicine" is beyond reason to me.
Just my thoughts.

I think it's important to differentiate between drugs or procedures that allow a player to play through pain or improve eyesight and drugs that unnaturally grow muscle mass or otherwise improve players performance beyond their natural ability.

 

[fearsomefour]

What's a performance enhancing drug, if I may ask? Can you give me a definition?

And that is the real rub to me.
I have a hard time thinking of a larger performance enhancer that when Tiger Woods got laser eye surgery. His eyesight naturally was what it was and it was changed to be better that 20/20. This can certainly be defined as a performance enhancer, he changed his natural body by outside means to make it better than it would naturally be to better his performance. To be able to see the course, read a green ect. without the need of contacts or glasses is a huge thing.
So how is it defined? Not as easy as first it seems at first glance.
As I have said before the view that a lot of people have that one pill is an evil drug because it is on a list and one pill is medicine because it not is sort of senseless to me. Sports of all kinds create young people addicted to pain killers every year. A player getting a pain injection to go back out to play (this certainly could be considered a short term performance enhancer) is lauded as being tough while a guy putting on a testosterone patch for post game recovery is a cheater.
I don't support or like cheating but when it comes to PEDs there is so much hypocrisy.

 

[fearsomefour]

I think it's important to differentiate between drugs or procedures that allow a player to play through pain or improve eyesight and drugs that unnaturally grow muscle mass or otherwise improve players performance beyond their natural ability.

Someone who gets eye surgery to improve his vision and there by his performance way beyond what his bodies natural performance would be....that is the same to me as someone taking a drug that allows for faster recovery or a 10% bump in lifting performance.

 

[Lunchbox]

5Does improved eyesight allow a player who couldn't hit a ball 500 feet before to do so now? Maybe, if that player already had the power to do so but couldn't see the ball clearly enough to make solid contact.

Is that the same as a player taking or injecting a substance that clearly changes his body and gives him the added power to do what he couldn't before?

How we answer these questions might shed some light on why some people have issues with PED's:

1. What are the side effects from doing this?
2. Does taking part in this create an unlevel playing field?
3. Is this substance or procedure considered restorative or corrective?
4. What is the potential for misuse or abuse?
5. Is it's use banned by the sport?

When it comes down to it the ones that matter the most to me are #2 and #5. My objections aren't to the drugs themselves but to the way they may be used/misused/abused. While there may be risks to corrective eye surgery I don't in any way see a correlation between that and steroid/HGH use.

 

[jrry32]

And that is the real rub to me.
I have a hard time thinking of a larger performance enhancer that when Tiger Woods got laser eye surgery. His eyesight naturally was what it was and it was changed to be better that 20/20. This can certainly be defined as a performance enhancer, he changed his natural body by outside means to make it better than it would naturally be to better his performance. To be able to see the course, read a green ect. without the need of contacts or glasses is a huge thing.
So how is it defined? Not as easy as first it seems at first glance.
As I have said before the view that a lot of people have that one pill is an evil drug because it is on a list and one pill is medicine because it not is sort of senseless to me. Sports of all kinds create young people addicted to pain killers every year. A player getting a pain injection to go back out to play (this certainly could be considered a short term performance enhancer) is lauded as being tough while a guy putting on a testosterone patch for post game recovery is a cheater.
I don't support or like cheating but when it comes to PEDs there is so much hypocrisy.

Fearsomefour, perfect. You said exactly what I was alluding to.

If anyone has seen the PED policy, it basically said that any drug put on this certain list by congress is a PED. If it's taken off the list, it's not a PED. So what is and isn't a PED is what congress tells us?

For example, NFL players were given a painkiller called Toradol for years. It made it easier for players to play with an injury. That would increase performance, yes? It also made it more difficult for a player to realize that they got injured in the game...especially with concussions. So it had a negative side effect. And yet, I don't think most of us would consider that a PED. They'd say it was medicine to help the player...but it did boost performance.

It's just an interesting topic. Not as black and white as most want to believe.

 

[Lunchbox]

Fearsomefour, perfect. You said exactly what I was alluding to.

If anyone has seen the PED policy, it basically said that any drug put on this certain list by congress is a PED. If it's taken off the list, it's not a PED. So what is and isn't a PED is what congress tells us?

For example, NFL players were given a painkiller called Toradol for years. It made it easier for players to play with an injury. That would increase performance, yes? It also made it more difficult for a player to realize that they got injured in the game...especially with concussions. So it had a negative side effect. And yet, I don't think most of us would consider that a PED. They'd say it was medicine to help the player...but it did boost performance.

It's just an interesting topic. Not as black and white as most want to believe.

@jrry and fearsomefour, I have a lot of respect for both of you as major contributors to this board and really good, solid posters. I understand what you're saying and don't necessarily disagree. I cannot define what a PED is. That determination is best left to people in a position to lay out the parameters and conduct the research, but I believe we are talking different subjects.

The cases I've alluded to were cut and dried situations of players knowingly using banned substances in the pursuit of historic milestones in their sports. I don't particularly care if they profited from doing this. What I do care about is the effect their actions have on the sport itself and milestones set by players from previous eras without the aid of such effective PEDs.

You can agree or not, it's just how I feel. A cheater is a cheater. The rest is just semantics.

 

[fearsomefour]

5Does improved eyesight allow a player who couldn't hit a ball 500 feet before to do so now? Maybe, if that player already had the power to do so but couldn't see the ball clearly enough to make solid contact.

Is that the same as a player taking or injecting a substance that clearly changes his body and gives him the added power to do what he couldn't before?

How we answer these questions might shed some light on why some people have issues with PED's:

1. What are the side effects from doing this?
2. Does taking part in this create an unlevel playing field?
3. Is this substance or procedure considered restorative or corrective?
4. What is the potential for misuse or abuse?
5. Is it's use banned by the sport?

When it comes down to it the ones that matter the most to me are #2 and #5. My objections aren't to the drugs themselves but to the way they may be used/misused/abused. While there may be risks to corrective eye surgery I don't in any way see a correlation between that and steroid/HGH use.

5 good questions.
The issue of something being corrective or being used to create an unfair advantage is an interesting way to look at the issue. That is the lens I have have framing things in. Using the eye surgery example again applies here as it is corrective, but, it is also amending the natural state of the body beyond its normal limitation.
You bring up some great points.

 

[fearsomefour]

@jrry and fearsomefour, I have a lot of respect for both of you as major contributors to this board and really good, solid posters. I understand what you're saying and don't necessarily disagree. I cannot define what a PED is. That determination is best left to people in a position to lay out the parameters and conduct the research, but I believe we are talking different subjects.

The cases I've alluded to were cut and dried situations of players knowingly using banned substances in the pursuit of historic milestones in their sports. I don't particularly care if they profited from doing this. What I do care about is the effect their actions have on the sport itself and milestones set by players from previous eras without the aid of such effective PEDs.

You can agree or not, it's just how I feel. A cheater is a cheater. The rest is just semantics.

Yeah we can agree to disagree. I respect your opinion certainly and you bring up some good points.
This issue, like many things with shades of gray and hypocrisy, is layered in semantics.
Whether I think the rules are badly designed and implemented or not, I agree with you 100% with someone knowingly trying to skirt the rules.
Good discussion.

 

[LesBaker]

Yeah we can agree to disagree. I respect your opinion certainly and you bring up some good points.
This issue, like many things with shades of gray and hypocrisy, is layered in semantics.
Whether I think the rules are badly designed and implemented or not, I agree with you 100% with someone knowingly trying to skirt the rules.
Good discussion.

Sadly these types of drugs are ruining sport all over the world, not just the NFL. Athletes in every sport seem to be cheating, and now when I see an amazing athletic accomplishment or a record fall the first thing that comes to my mind is "is it real" because it seems that most of the time it isn't.

I hope that the penalties become so harsh that athletes are afraid to use them because they can be banned for good and that the possibility of them looking at many wasted years of practice and training will be a deterrent. It would be easy to do and simple to implement. Hopefully players in other sports will start to follow the lead of the guys in MLB and say "enough is enough" and take a stand against the 30-40% (or more) that are cheating.

 

[Prime Time]

NFL Pain-Killer Culture: John Madden Says Broadcast Announcer Gets Shots, Too

SAN FRANCISCO (CBS SF) — A day after a lawsuit filed by former players against the National Football League alleging illegal and unethical administration of pain-killing drugs causing long-term health effects, Hall of Fame coach John Madden offered an anecdote Wednesday of the league’s drug culture extending up to the announcing booth.

In the suit, players such as former San Francisco 49er Jeremy Newberry allege they would line up so team trainers could inject them with the powerful painkiller Toradol without prescriptions or warnings of possible side effects. Other pain medications such as Percodan, Percocet and Vicodin were handed out “like candy,” according to lead attorney Steven Silverman.

During his Daily Madden segment with KCBS Radio in San Francisco, Madden said at least one announcer has taken advantage of the readily available pain-killing injections. “I know an announcer that goes down to the locker room to get a Toradol shot before a game,” said Madden.

A number of former football players have made the move to the announcing booth after retiring from the game. Madden did not identify the announcer or say if he was a former player, but he said the announcer gets the Toradol injection because he is in pain.

“I think he goes at a different time [than the players], you know, he gets there early, you know, that type of thing,” said Madden. “But he’s gotten Toradol shots.”

• Daily Madden: Listen To Full Interview On NFL Lawsuit

According to the lawsuit, “…the NFL has intentionally, recklessly, and negligently developed a culture of drug misuse, substituting players’ health for profit.”

The players seek financial compensation for the long-term chronic injuries, financial losses and long-term health care for future problems they will suffer.

Former-NFL Players File Lawsuit Against the NFL Alleging Illegal Use of Painkillers By The League
by ELIZABETH MURRAY @elizabthmurray

Another summer, another class-action lawsuit against the NFL. This time, eight former NFL players—Richard Dent, Jim McMahon, Jeremy Newberry, Roy Green, J.D. Hill, Keith Van Horne, Ron Stone, and Ron Pritchard—filed a class-action lawsuit alleging that the NFL supplied them with illegally prescribed painkillers throughout their careers, which led to medical complications such as addiction later in life.

Specifically, the players are alleging:

1. The NFL illegally and unethically supplied players serious pain medications, including addictive opioids, and NSAIDs such as torodol.

2. The NFL did so for financial gain, in order to keep them in competition rather than allowing them to rest and heal.

3. The NFL “fraudulently concealed” the dangerous side effects of the drugs from players.

3. The illegal prescription of these painkillers has led to dangerous medical conditions later in life, including painkiller addiction, stage 3 renal failure and high blood pressure.

More than 500 other former players have signed on to the lawsuit, which was filed today in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, according to lawyers representing the former athletes. They are looking to make the case a class action lawsuit.

An NFL spokesman told Fusion that NFL lawyers have not yet had time to review the lawsuit.

The full complaint outlines how plaintiff after plaintiff went through the same ordeal: illegal prescription of painkillers, deceit about both the injuries and the side effects of the drugs, and subsequent medical damage.

Some excerpts include:

“Named Plaintiff Jeremy Newberry received hundreds of Toradol injections over the course of his career and for many games, would receive as many as five or six injections of other medications during the course of a game. He also would receive Vicodin before, during and after games to numb pain and often during a game would simply ask a trainer for medications, which would be provided without record as to who was receiving what.”

“While playing in the NFL, Mr. Hill received hundreds, if not thousands, of pills from trainers and doctors, including but not limited to NSAIDs, Codeine, Valium and Librium. No one from the NFL ever talked to him about the side effects of the medications he was being given or cocktailing. He left the League addicted to painkillers, which he was forced to purchase on the streets to deal with his football-related pain, a path that led him to other street medications. He eventually became homeless and was in and out of 15 drug treatment centers for a period of over 20 years until overcoming his NFL-sponsored drug addiction.”

"Mr. Green, who received hundreds of NSAIDs (which can cause kidney damage) from NFL doctors and trainers, had tests performed on him while he played in the NFL that showed he had high creatinine levels, indicative of a limitation on his kidney function. No one from the NFL ever told him of those findings. In November 2012, he had a kidney transplant."

Of course, this is the second class-action lawsuit filed against the NFL by former players. In August 2013, the league agreed to a $765 million settlement with former players who alleged the league lied to players about the physical danger of concussions, which created long-term disabilities for the players that were not covered by league insurance.

 

[RaminExile]

Im all for PEDs. Its no different than having super advanced nutrition really is it. Its just a different way of getting the chemicals you need into your body. Same as vegetables. Except it kills you. But if players want to do it - its their body. I want to see the fastest, strongest human beings possible - so if HGH helps go for it. I'd love them to legalize it for the Olympics as well. I want to see how fast Bolt could run if he was juiced to the max.

In addition - its the only real way of ensuring a totally level playing field.

Furthermore - don't get confused that taking drugs is the "easy way" to getting huge. It takes incredible amounts of work and time in the gym. The drugs let the guys be physically capable of doing it without dropping dead of exhaustion. It still takes massive dedication and genes to be really big/fast/strong.

Obviously drug use should be discouraged for kids growing up because of the health concerns - but when it comes to getting paid millions of dollars guys are going to do it regardless of the risks, just as they know the risks of concussions but still play.

I've been saying for a long time - I think the league feels the same way. Until a lifetime ban is handed out for a repeated PED infringement - or even for the first offense no one really cares. 4 games?? Its nothing in the grand scheme.

 

[Prime Time]

Obviously drug use should be discouraged for kids growing up because of the health concerns

Of course the kids emulate their sports heroes and if it's okay for them then.......

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

I don't want to see some guy running for a TD and his heart explodes. And I surely don't want it to be my son one day.

 

[RaminExile]

I don't want to see some guy running for a TD and his heart explodes. And I surely don't want it to be my son one day.

But no one cares about guys dying at 50 from Lou Gehrigs or heart attacks from being so big? I understand mine is a minority opinion - but I don't think that the health issues to do with football are that far removed from something like PEDS.