With the recent news around Clemson's suspensions (I realize there is already a thread), I thought it might be interesting to have a broader discussion around steroid use in college football.
What % of college football players do you think are doing some type of performance enhancing drugs?
Does it start at the high school level? Are the strength programs complicit?
There is no possible way that some % of these guys aren't taking steroids. There is too much upside for signing an NFL contract. I just wonder if teams with more resources are able to game the system easier, similar to the way Floyd Landis described Lance Armstrong's advantage in a sport where everyone was doping.
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
The stuff the Clemson guys tested possitive for can be found in most every guy who takes lifting seriously. If you go into GNC and buy creatine, pre workout, etc a lot of them have Info on the back about how they are not recommended for NCAA athletes due to banned substance, see C4. Same stuff Will grier at WVU got busted for. I imagine this is another reason why VT has that nice protein/Smoothie bar for our guys. Take a look at the CFB from the 80s, a lot of those guys were taking legit anabolic steroids.
Appreciate the insight. Wondering why the NCAA is banning substances that are legal and sold in GNC. Is the stuff really that bad for you? I know nothing about weightlifting.
Explanation here.
More detail at that link, but a summary (emphasis mine):
Very interesting. Thanks.
I know this is going to get close to the no politics line, but the issue stems directly from Orrin Hatch singlehandedly gutting the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 by allowing the supplement industry to include the dislaimer, "This product has not been tested by the FDA." By stating this, supplements do not have to prove their products have any efficacy or are safe. Why Orrin Hatch? Because Utah's top industry is vitamins and supplements, annually grossing over $7 Billion, or nearly 10% of the state's domestic product.
ETA: Any of the down voters on what I wrote below brave enough to actually comment on what you find so objectionable?
There are vast areas of commerce that are allowed great latitude despite potential health risks that have yet to be investigated at all, much less with any hope of certainty.
Likewise, there are any number of products and past-times that carry FDA health warnings that are risible given the extremes one would have to go to to even possibly suffer any ill effects.
Rather than castigate a single politician for a single policy on this board where arguing the whys and wherefores is specifically prohibited, it might be better to consider things with a broader perspective and refrain from going down that rabbit hole in the first place.
Now I know why my kid gives me sh** for not knowing high school civics. Had no idea one politician could get this done.
Philosophically, I'd a been ok with it, because the trial lawyers will sue the bejesus out of products and organizations that don't do enough quality control they get people sick.
Beyond that there are a whole sh** ton of people who mostly purchase a sh** ton of supplements only to just pee them out a few ours later. Who is the FDA to stop them from having the right to do so?
But yeah, f the repubs. Right there with ya.
Oof, I see you just said fuck "the line."
Oooooof😲😲
[whispering] Psst... the Act was passed by a Dem-majority House and Dem-majority Senate and signed by Bill Clinton. (Disclaimer: just a historical fyi -- not meant to provoke passion for one party or the other)
There is a level of safety that must be met. Looking at the Act, it requires for it already to already be taken by individuals or if new, some showing that it is to be safe. The burden is on the FDA to show that the supplement (based on ingredients within) is unsafe if this initial showing is met.
Legal Language
More info on how the FDA oversees supplements from CNN.
My Florida #sauces said Grier never used PED's, it was a coke issue, and it got to the point where his dealer interrupted a team function because Grier hadn't paid him. Coach blamed it on PED's to make it easier for Grier to find a landing spot. Can't be sure how true this, but I like this story more.
Technically they blamed it on a banned substance which has never been proven to be performance enhancing.
PS: I just cant believe this story, maybe for another coach, but McElwain is too much of an ass.
Well it's Florida so it's believable, but it'd be more believable if it was Miami
Give this comment a read...
Shout out to SCHokie2011
Edit: For those that don't know, or may be too young to remember, this is Lattimer from the movie The Program (the character that was using steroids. Great movie on college football (very loosely based on FSU, the dominate program at the time).
place at the table?
Pfft, that's nothing compared to 30,000 people coming to watch a kid do a chemistry experiment.
Does any one know where I can watch the original opening sequence without a laser disc player? I have never seen it. The DVD didnt include it?
You tube
Well that was disappointing, first typing in the program cars tells you how to program a garage door, second I thought cars drove over them, I mean i was 11 when this happened so I probably remember incorrectly what I was told.
Lol...I saw this on my 11th bday with a group of friends in the theater. Perhaps a questionable decision by my mother. I dont remember wanting to lay down in the street afterward though.
Well I doubt you were as drunk as the football players, if you were then your mother might need a lesson in decision making.
Rumors were just about the entire Stanford team under Harbaugh were on the juice.
I heard that was just Kool aid. /s
That was just all the whole milk and steak.
Mmmm....milk steak.
With a side of your finest jelly beans.
Or they could've just drank fight milk. I drink it every morning so I can fight, like a crow.
Definitely NOT chicken.
That Orange Bowl still hurts
We lost that game bc we couldnt stop Zach Ertz and the TEs.
Harbaugh saw what we were doing on defense, adjusted at half and destroyed us every which way on offense.
There were no adjustments to stop three 6'6+ tight ends. We had safeties/corners/anyone covering them. It's a shame we finally broke. Our lethargic offense (that was actually one of the best VT offenses of my lifetime) wasn't helping matters either.
The only issue I ever have with your takes on our defense/Bud is not that you are criticizing them, but that you often criticize them on things that are categorically untrue. Bud is historically over a 20+ year DC career, GREAT at making half-time adjustments. Over that 20+ year career there were also games where the other coach made better ones (it happens to everyone), but it's easier to remember the bad ones than the 20 good ones inbetween. I also posted so many numbers for GT about how we more often than not held them below their scoring and rushing yard averages. We had a really bad year this year, but it was not such a systemic issue, and provably was false when you examined all our games against PJ. OR when you declared that no team was worse at stopping running QB's (and non-running QB's from rushing the ball) and someone found an example for every single QB you mentioned running for more yards against someone else.
Bruh...you dont need to make this a big thing lol. Stanford destroyed us that second half. Shit happens. They were for sure the better team. It doesn't have to have systemic implications.
Of course they did. I didn't deny that anywhere. I'm also not upset at all, just felt like it was as good a time as any to remind DC that most of his opinions are categorically false. It's good to give little reminders about all the things he's been explicitly proved wrong over every once in awhile. I like to think if it keeps at least one casual reader from starting to believe his narratives as fact, then it's worth it.
You should post every day that I have been wrong on here before. It doesn't make you petty or D "bagy" at all, no. As you said, you are doing a service. Wouldn't want fans to think we have struggled against GT before. I think you are selling the community short only occasionally pointing out how I was "categorically wrong" in terms of cherry picked deep stats dating back 20 seasons about an opinion on running QBs 2 years ago. The board would be much better if you posted that burn every day.
I'm sorry, did I just read dcwilson critiquing someone over holding a grudge for too long and wasting the community's time with douchy posts that don't add value?
Honestly, I really just think it's a TKP meme at this point for you to angrily make sarcastic posts to talk shit about our defense, at this point it's funny. That doesn't mean I won't occasionally remind people that these takes are not based in statistical reality when you try to make blanket statements about how this always happens to Bud, or we're the worst team in the country against running QB's (literally every fanbase complains about this).
Lol, that sounds petty as hell. Just gonna pop into his comments to post irrelevant stuff? Come on, thats embarrassing. It comes off like he is living rent free in your head.
Are you talking about Chris or dc?
/s
The one that deserves it right now. And its obvious.
LOL. What about the Stanford game did I say that was untrue? How did we hold those 6'06 TEs to 12 points in the first half? You don't like ANY criticism of Bud- we get it. Even this year when the defense is one of the worst in CFB, you don't like any critique. I get it.
I was very critical of the defense this year.
What did I say about the Stanford game that was "categorically false"? Thanks
Re-read my first post as I'm not saying everything you say is false. I was pointing out that you cling to the exceptions to the rule to drive your larger narratives that are often not based in statistical reality in larger sample sizes. Simple as that.
Also I didn't downvote you, and I upvoted you to offset those downvotes.
It was not just the so-called skilled players, their offensive line opened up huge holes in our defensive line.
I've always thought baseball gets a bad wrap because they tried to clean their sport up. You can't convince me that 90% of the NFL isn't on something. There is a reason that all of a sudden 270 lb linemen can run 4.4s and it ain't creatinine. But you don't hear anything about PEDs in the NFL because no one gets caught. They only get caught for dope.
It is very hard to actually find a substance that will confer an advantage. Most things are placebo.
You think you're so smart go ahead and invent something. Just remember you have to compete with evolution. Not 2 freaking easy.
4 instance, Armstrong verdict, doped with some sh** that doesn't confer an advantage. but no one wants to talk about that.
ahh yes, of course steroids don't work. That's why athletes risk long term health, millions of dollars in earnings and possible jail time to take them...because they don't work of course.
You never heard of a high school athlete making bad decisions?
You never heard of a health fad or diet fad that the "experts" promised would give results, that turned out to be bogus?
I've heard of both of those. Neither have much to do about steroid use in pro sports though. Especially anabolic steroids that plagued MLB and the NFL in the past. You act as if its a one off "mistake" or "fad" neither is true.
NFL players get popped for PEDs quite often.
NFL suspensions
It is a large page and the table on substance related suspensions doesn't differentiate between PEDs and recreational drugs, but the listed references can tell you which drug policy the suspension is for.
I count 16 suspensions in 2018 alone for PEDs with notable players Mark Ingram, Thomas Davis, Vontaze Burfict, Julian Edelman, and even Mark Sanchez. I didn't count players where the reason for the suspension wasn't disclosed, but a four game suspension is a clue that it may be PED related.
They tend to happen mostly in the spring and summer so players are smart enough to try to time their doping. It should also be noted that it wasn't until 2017 that they could reliably test for HGH.
Mark Sanchez took PEDs??? Wow, wouldn't have guessed that one.
So it sounds like the NFL hides their PED use better than other sports. This definitely makes sense as I think other sports caught on to the major backlash baseball went through a few years back.
I'm sure people are constantly finding ways to cheat without being caught but I'm also sceptical if the NFL really tries very hard to catch people doping period. Money makes the world go round and the more doping that goes on, the better their product is, as long as the public thinks that DLman X was just born with the speed of a Usain Bolt and the size of Andre the Giant. And to be honest, I really don't care except for the fact that the people that try to do things right are the ones left out in the cold. It's just like college football teams paying players, the NCAA will never punish the teams that do it so the teams that don't will forever be screwed.
It's called Toradol. You feel no pain.
I can't speak for steroids, but cleaning up the locker room in my day, there were players that had weed in their locker and it wasn't hidden at all.
I remember one guy tested positive before the nfl draft a few years ago. He was blunt that he had a shoulder injury and needed to regain his strength fast. They worked like a charm.