Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

No problem with doping in NFL

5 views
Skip to first unread message

Anton Berlin

unread,
May 4, 2011, 7:32:02 PM5/4/11
to
Looks like they get it all done between college and their first
paycheck.

"First paycheck" that isn't cash, cars or cunt.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/Von-Miller-then-and-now-How-recruits-grow-and?urn=ncaaf-wp1188

Substance McGravitas

unread,
May 4, 2011, 8:10:23 PM5/4/11
to

I like the story, but NFL players quit doping after their first paycheck
in much the way LA quit doping after he got cancer.

Ronsonic

unread,
May 4, 2011, 9:34:14 PM5/4/11
to

"Anton Berlin" <truth...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8b34ada7-9144-4185...@p7g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...

Are we shocked that the sort of young men drafted by the NFL are the sort
who, when put into a professionally managed training environment, put on a
bunch of muscle between the ages of 18 and 23?

Because we know it just ain't natural for a guy that age to bulk up by
lifting weights and eating and stuff.

Yeah, yeah, there is that "and stuff," but really, this isn't exactly
freaky.


yirgster

unread,
May 5, 2011, 2:28:45 AM5/5/11
to Ronsonic
Defensive rookie player of the year in 2009, Brian Cushing, kept his award after a re-vote after it had been revealed he tested positive for drugs during the season.

It's a sports writers' award, not that of the league.

-----------------------------------

NEW YORK -- A positive drug test notwithstanding, Houston Texans linebacker Brian Cushing is still The Associated Press NFL Defensive Rookie of the Year.

Five days after he was suspended without pay for four games, a nationwide panel of 50 sports writers and broadcasters who cover the NFL voted again to give Cushing the award. He didn't receive anywhere near the 39 votes of his previous landslide victory, but the 18 he got in Wednesday's revote were enough to reclaim the honor.

...

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5183620

Phil H

unread,
May 5, 2011, 9:26:26 AM5/5/11
to
On May 4, 6:34 pm, "Ronsonic" <ronso...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> "Anton Berlin" <truth_88...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

>
> news:8b34ada7-9144-4185...@p7g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Looks like they get it all done between college and their first
> > paycheck.
>
> > "First paycheck" that isn't cash, cars or cunt.
>
> >http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/Von-Mille...

>
> Are we shocked that the sort of young men drafted by the NFL are the sort
> who, when put into a professionally managed training environment, put on a
> bunch of muscle between the ages of 18 and 23?
>
> Because we know it just ain't natural for a guy that age to bulk up by
> lifting weights and eating and stuff.
>
> Yeah, yeah, there is that "and stuff," but really, this isn't exactly
> freaky.

Exactly, how does the reported statistic compare with the general
population's weight increase from age 18 to 23?
Phil H

Vagina Gorilla

unread,
May 5, 2011, 10:13:17 AM5/5/11
to

HS kids are juiced too

Fred Flintstein

unread,
May 5, 2011, 10:28:06 AM5/5/11
to

Maybe a decade ago I saw an article where a guy looked up the listed
weights of star high school linemen over a ten year period. He found
about a 50 lb (22.7 kg) weight gain. I'll bet just about every Div 1
recruit is familiar with "stuff".

Fred Flintstein

Jim Feeley

unread,
May 5, 2011, 12:19:34 PM5/5/11
to

Also, reported player weights are frequently inaccurate. Depending on position,
weights are inflated or deflated by coaching staffs, agents, and players. So
some of the weight gain is due to "and stuff." But how much?

And yes, some high school kids are juiced. But how many? The published surveys
are fairly bogus. Texas recently released the results of their steroid testing
program for high school athletes. 2083 tests, one positive (and one failure to
show up for the test). But those tests included golfers and others who might be
less likely to use steroids. It looks like only 469 of the tests were of
football players (there's a category for boys multi-sport athletes; 344 of those
were tested). Texas is a big state. So who knows if the test results show that
not many kids use steroids or if the testing was week.

Jim
--
Jim
Jim Feeley
POV Media

Ronsonic

unread,
May 5, 2011, 12:28:35 PM5/5/11
to

"Phil H" <phol...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:61d3feb7-5292-4e3b...@f15g2000pro.googlegroups.com...

These kids aren't the general population, that's sorta the entire point
about them. They are self-selected and then further selected by experts over
a period of years. They wouldn't have either Div I scholarships or NFL draft
positions if they were normal.

They are distinctive in both seeking / accepting rigorous training and by
responding to it. I could (did) pound hell out of myself in the weight room
without much upper body bulk for a result. The same is probably true for
most cyclists.

I don't doubt there's some serious juicing going on. At the same time,
that's an age when muscle growth is at a peak anyway. The idea that there's
something unnatural about a guy that age packing on 30 pounds of muscle over
four years of intense, professionally coached training is almost as weird as
the theory that anyone who goes faster than Greg Lemond must be drugged.
IOW, as "proof" of doping goes, this is about the weakest evidence that
could be presented.

Some of the other weight gains cited in that article are also unremarkable.
The guy who went from Tight End to Tackle and picked up 50 some pounds is
not surprising either. Hell some people gain that much just from getting a
desk job.


Kurgan Gringioni

unread,
May 6, 2011, 4:53:55 AM5/6/11
to

"Fred Flintstein" <bob.sc...@sbcremoveglobal.net> wrote in message
news:hq2dnTW26rBqLl_Q...@giganews.com...

Dumbass -

The weight gain was 10lbs./decade for many decades, then suddenly there was
a 30lb. gain, not 50lbs.

But 30 is still a lot, mostly explained by 'roids.

thanks,

Kurgan. presented by Gringioni.


Jim Feeley

unread,
May 6, 2011, 9:21:40 AM5/6/11
to

Cheeseburger doping is probably worse for your health than many banned PEDs.

Simply Fred

unread,
May 6, 2011, 10:08:48 AM5/6/11
to
Jim Feeley wrote:
> Cheeseburger doping is probably worse for your health than many banned PEDs.

I bet McQuaid would test positive for cheeseburgers.

Substance McGravitas

unread,
May 6, 2011, 1:30:24 PM5/6/11
to
On 5/4/2011 4:32 PM, Anton Berlin wrote:

Drug testing in the NFL works like this:
http://deadspin.com/#!5615938/a-look-inside-the-nfls-drug-testing-methods-chad-ochocincos-bladder

Anton Berlin

unread,
May 6, 2011, 6:22:13 PM5/6/11
to

>
> Drug testing in the NFL works like this:http://deadspin.com/#!5615938/a-look-inside-the-nfls-drug-testing-met...

New definition for "Hanging Chad" ?

Substance McGravitas

unread,
May 6, 2011, 8:48:13 PM5/6/11
to
On 5/6/2011 3:22 PM, Anton Berlin wrote:
>
>>
>> Drug testing in the NFL works like this:http://deadspin.com/#!5615938/a-look-inside-the-nfls-drug-testing-met...
>
> New definition for "Hanging Chad" ?

Chad's fine, he just has to go drink a bunch of water.

Phil H

unread,
May 6, 2011, 9:04:31 PM5/6/11
to
On May 5, 9:28 am, "Ronsonic" <ronso...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> "Phil H" <pholma...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> desk job.- Hide quoted text -
>
You contradict me then agree with me; these sort of weight gains
aren't too unremarkable in the general population so why would we not
expect similar gains in a sport where its advantageous to weigh more.
I've heard these guys like to eat.

On the other hand, show up at your first cycling pro training camp as
a newbie and they'll tell you to come back when you've lost 15lbs.

Phil H

0 new messages