Who cares what athletes put in their bodies?

TJ Johnson Oct 20, 2012 2:55 PM

Happy endings rare in sports
msn.foxsports.com

Do you think anyone cares what Kobe Bryant does to get his knees ready for an 82-game NBA season? You think David Stern and the league’s television partners care? The same could be said of Peyton Manning’s neck and Ray Lewis’ triceps.

I hope Kobe plays forever (as long as he’s never perceived as a better player than Magic Johnson). Kobe is entertaining, compelling and fun to analyze. So are Manning, Lewis and A-Rod. My position on PEDs has been pretty consistent for quite some time. Athletes are entertainers, the same as musicians. I don’t much care what drugs Led Zeppelin, Guns N Roses or Marvin Gaye used to make good music. I don’t care what athletes do to take the field.

Although it's a minority position to take in American sports, I agree with Whitlock on this one. I don't care what athletes put in their bodies as long as they know the associated risks; further, he's right to call football entertainment. It may be more enduring than hot-oil wrestling (although I know where I'd rather be during a 4th-quarter blowout), and Roger Goodell would have you believe it's as American as the Boy Scouts, apple pie, and a Tim Tebow speaking engagement (that will be $30,000, thanks), but at the end of the day, it's just another way to occupy your leisure time--you know, like composing showtunes, masturbation, or watching reality TV. As long as you are consuming something, you contribute to a Keynesian multiplier.

Now, fire up that plasma TV and drink something that has caffeine or alcohol (preferably both)--two substances the NFL hasn't banned.

I’m glad we had this talk. Now, vaya con Dios, Brah.

Agree, disagree, just like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter so I can quit my day job.

Yes, it dehumanizes the sport. But, if there were a way to spin the acceptance of PEDs into larger profits for the sport, you can be sure it would happen.

Posted by Ty Thompson on 2012-10-23 05:00:49

Officially allowing PEDs would obviously hit the profitability of pro sports in a devastating way. People don't take their families to the horse race. So, those who turn a profit from the sport (and there is a long list, as you know) most certainly care - about maintaining the premise, at least.

Posted by Ty Thompson on 2012-10-23 04:56:09

The title of this thread made me instantly conjure up the image of Ted Washington and Warren Sapp trying to grab some twinkies hanging off a goal post at Raiders camp as depicted in a Bang! cartoon a few years back.

Posted by Ben Duke on 2012-10-22 14:22:02

I feel bad for the cyclists back then that were trying to compete PED-free. I hate imagining a future where someone avoiding PEDs would be seen as naive.

Posted by tunesmith on 2012-10-21 14:12:04

Sports is different than most entertainment, in that it's a physical contest, it's not pre-scripted, and everyone has a chance to compete fairly (except in boxing). Letting athletes use PEDs would ruin it for me, and it would put the athletes in a bad situation - either use PEDs, or lose out to the athletes who use them Many great athletes might choose not to compete at all.

As a society, we should save the rewards of success in sports for those who don't use PEDs.

Posted by billyricky on 2012-10-21 05:52:35

PEDs affect some folks more than others. Still not a level playing field.

And heavy use of any drug will kill you. Cancer or otherwise.

Posted by AlexXSmith on 2012-10-21 00:31:08

I raise my son, not sports, or TV, or anything else. I'm responsible for his outcome, not some stranger playing a game.

Please. Like I need some jackwipe raising my boy for me. He's going to be a person adding real, essential value to society, not a gorilla playing a game.

Posted by John Tomasik on 2012-10-21 00:07:03

So what was Lance Armstrong? The fact is, we will never know now. We will never know just what he could or would have accomplished without cheating. Now it appears that not only was that whole sport cheating, it became maniacal with Lance evidently acting as a Drug Lord - complete with harassment and intimidation. Do you want all sports to descend into the sewage Cycling has become? What does your advocated permissiveness say to our kids growing up in sports...go ahead and cheat? And we know they will over due it being kids and adolescents....then what? Some may say I don't want to do it but I have to to stay competitive? I have to dope up to make varsity, get scholarships, get drafted, be a starter, stay in the sport when its harmful... And then another series of player lawsuits hell bent on killing the sport? Where does it end? Its cheating pure and simple as an excuse for either lack of preparation or physical ability one just doesn't have...Is that what we really want in sports? Is that the purpose of competition? I don't need to run Kilimanjoro for Olympic Training because I can juice up instead? And then what happens when the gambling world tries to influence play or taint the juice? There's just no end to it if permitted...its just plain cheating.

Posted by denverkewl on 2012-10-20 23:22:41

They need an all-steroid league and all-steroid competition. Trying to test out the drugs only confuses the history of the sport and alters the true order of winning. Is a modern day juiced player who breaks records really better than a guy who was taking 1970's era supplements and 3rd or 4th down the record books?

Posted by John Tomasik on 2012-10-20 20:23:48

To me, the fact that athletes are role models and heroes (even if they don't ask to be) pretty much blows this out of the water. They are marketed as specimens to emulate. As for a difference between them and entertainers, I'll throw out the fact that musicians are pretty much self-made and not part of a larger organization that has legal responsibilities to the public. Even when signed to labels, record labels are not really comparable to the NFL or MLB. I really don't think there's anything wrong with our society valuing fair play - the principle that competition should be about talent, hard work, and good body care.

Posted by tunesmith on 2012-10-20 19:11:29

I just skimmed Whitlock's article. The whole premise seems to be that people just can't seem to let go of their most cherished athletes. I just find this to be an utterly childish perspective. Nothing lasts forever. It was a strange and unsettling experience to see the Broncos go on without John Elway. The untimely truncation of Magic Johnson's career was painful for me. Although, not nearly as painful as the widespread belief back in 1992 that we would have to witness his untimely departure from the earth as well.

All great athletes have to say goodbye. Almost all performers and entertainers see their skills diminish with time. This is life. Dealing with loss is part of what makes us human. If you live long enough, you will lose most of the things you love. From your own abilities and faculties to the family and friends you hold most dear. This knowledge that our time here is finite should inform us to just how important it is to cherish what we have and to live the one life we know we're going to get to its fullest.

Posted by Yahmule on 2012-10-20 16:37:46

I, the fan, don't care what they put in their bodies. I really hope they do though. From the league's perspective, they sure as shit don't care, but have to have some level of banning and enforcement so they're not levied health related lawsuits when the player realizes the long term dammage vs the short-term performance. Of course, that's specifically to muscle, fast twitch, speed enhancing PED's, and I think any recovery based PED's should be as legal as any pills which are prescribed.

Rogan just had victor conte on his podcast the other day. Little long, but some good nuggets of info and doping back-stories. Fascinating stories how "pretend" that most testing is (because it's so expensive to fully test) and how they still skirt testing procedures. http://blog.joerogan.net/archi...

Posted by Joe Howard on 2012-10-20 16:33:18

I couldn't disagree more. It's fairly obvious PED usage is rampant in certain sports. The NFL will always have some degree of PED abuse and based on the utter disregard the league places on the health of their athletes, this is hardly surprising. MLB has cracked down on the use of PEDs and a cursory glance at the statistics the last several years bear this out. Of course, MLB gets soundly criticized because players like Ryan Braun* and Melky Cabrera tested dirty in the last 12 months. I view this more as the way MLB just faces a different standard with fans and media than the NFL, which is truly the most Teflon coated of sports leagues. The mere fact that they tagged an MVP and a potential batting champion as cheaters shows me they're committed to stopping, or at least limiting, the use of illegal substances.

The attitude that people shouldn't care what athletes use to stay on the field is pretty callous. There is wide disagreement among health care professionals as to the long term use of PEDs. Proponents of their usage say that anybody who follows doctor's directions won't have any problems. Of course, they'll say that anybody who winds up with long term issues violated the prescribed levels. If you're already advocating risky behavior and cheating, shifting the goal posts of the argument is a minor detail. Also, it's a given that many athletes will exceed recommended use of particular substances. You're already telling them it's okay to gain artificial advantages, so many of them will decide they need an additional edge. With no punitive restrictions in place, there will be nothing to stop them from pushing the limits.

Personally, I like to see some of the human element remain in sports. These athletes are already performing at levels the average person can't even relate to achieving. I have little interest in seeing a bunch of chemically enhanced freaks pitted against one another. I don't want a team chemist to take on the same importance as a capologist in determining the outcome of events.

This is all secondary, though. My primary objection to legalizing the usage of PEDs is the pressure it places on athletes to use merely to stay on a level playing field. Most pro athletes have been blessed with a natural amount of physical advantages. The ones who are serious about pro careers have had to maintain healthy lifestyles and work hard to achieve the highest levels of their chosen sport. If PED usage is allowed, it will quickly become expected. Fans will look at an athlete who doesn't want to risk his health (or who might have a moral objection to PED use) as someone who just isn't committed to winning. I don't like the idea that entire fan bases will be able to exert a Vince McMahon-like pressure upon these individuals to inject themselves with the latest designer chemicals so they can stay competitive. Legalizing PEDs would probably cause me to stop watching sports entirely.

Posted by Yahmule on 2012-10-20 16:26:10

A problem with not caring what athletes put in their bodies is that some of what they use (steroids, e.g.) are really bad for the person, and lead to nasty behavior on and off the field. There will always be people that don't care what they're doing to themselves (Lyle Alzado, e.g.), as long as it gives them an advantage. Then they have the edge over people that want to play the sport and retire when the time comes and live a long full life, bouncing the healthy grandkids on their knee.

Posted by bradley on 2012-10-20 16:11:23

Offseason 2013 Features

A post-draft look at the Broncos’ cap situation
Denver should have $7.48M in room following Phillips signing, will spend around $4M on rookies
Denver Broncos 2013 undrafted free agent signings
17 rookie free agents added to Denver's seven drafted players (Updated 5/12/13)
Denver Broncos 2013 free agency tracker
IAOFM tracks the Broncos' activity during 2013 free agency
Denver Broncos 2013 draft choice tracker
Denver has seven choices after fourth-round trade down with Green Bay

All Draft Features