Interesting responses, felt like sharing.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/9543856/college-football-...
DISCLAIMER: Blog posts may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Interesting responses, felt like sharing.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/9543856/college-football-...
Comments
The PED % was surprising to me...I guess I'm a little naive
The way the question is worded is interesting, that one player on a team is using. But what about teams where it is widespread? That was always the rumor about Boise, but just look at the players this year. Human bodies aren't meant to look like that or do that.
Even on your own team. There are probably 4-6 current VT players who I would have strong suspicions about, but PED use has proven over the years that it is often the marginal player taking just to stay on the team....guys you wouldn't even think about. The 3rd string LB'er, the ST'er.
It's also worth noting the rumors about how lax college football testing of any kind really is. Remember, it was Matthieu who said he failed so many marijuana tests at LSU that he lost count. Nobody knows the schools' policy. Is it failing one test? Five? Are PED's and recreational drugs in the same category? There is no transparency at all, probably for a reason.
i think a lot of people are naive to the ped thing. there's no standards to it, if they dont test for it or there's no repercussions why wouldnt you? as far as vt goes, every time i hear about a kid putting on 30 pounds of muscle in a year i question it. is that possible naturally?
I agree about the naivety to PEDs. I think 100% of NCAA teams have players who takes PEDs and suspect it's far more widespread than most people think. As BCH alluded to, today's PEDs are so undetectable that even Lance Armstrong never technically failed a drug test and plenty of MLB players who were known to use never failed either despite having what is regarded as the toughest drug testing policy out of the major American sports. PED testing in the NCAA is light years behind and the pressure to perform continues to soar higher than ever in college football. If you don't think these players, who have time restrictions, are doing anything they can to get an edge, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
Agree with everyone above. I'm pretty familiar with their use, and there are so many things. PEDs don't just translate to Illegal AAS.
And its possible to gain 30 lbs in a year. How much of it would be fat depends on how long you've been lifting. A complete noob could gain about 24 lbs lean mass in a year, where the gains shoot down pretty drastically the longer you've been lifting.
Think about it though, how have most MLB players (espescially the bigger names) been caught with PEDs.
Newspapers get a scoop and do the investigating that proves these guys guilty. They have far better investigative skills than any sports organization (lookin' at you NCAA).
Take the Manziel story for example, some news report initially found it and now the NCAA is scrambling around like a chicken with it's head cut off trying to prove it, and in all likliehood they won't have enough evidence to do anything until Manziel is long gone.
Gayle did it by eating late night peanut butter and jelly sandwiches
Shoot, now I really want a PB&J....
The souls of opposing quarterbacks are also rich in protein and several key vitamins, as I understand.
The phrase "____ put on ___ pounds of muscle in ____ amount of time" is the most annoyingly overused phrase ever. People seem to think that because someone goes to the gym and also puts on weight that it's all muscle when oftentimes it's not even 50%. I saw a Yahoo article this year (yeah, I know, their articles suck) where the headline was pertaining to Mark Wahlberg putting on 40 pounds of muscle in 2 months. Yeah that's impossible.
In regards to the PED thing, remember that they could include steroids or drugs like Adderall. Adderall and similar drugs are so easy to get so it wouldn't surprise me if players were using those to get a leg up.
I wish they gave numbers on how many from each conference they interviewed because I have a feeling there is a large separation between the number of violations in the SEC compared to the MAC.
Pretty cool article. I found it interesting that Graham is thought of as worse than Kiffin. I find that shocking. Kiffin is the bottom of the barrel.
any coach who would tell his team through text that he's leaving is a tool. i'm sure he preaches accountability to his players at asu. putting the "god bless" at the end of the text is even more annoying. keep your blessings to yourself coach.
I'm more surprised Petrino didn't get more votes. I guess everyone forgot about the Falcons thing. That with what happened at Arkansas makes him a coach I would want no part of.
Saban pulled the same shit in Miami. Declaring he would remain the Dolphins coach while movers simultaneously loaded all his belongings into a van.
Winning>Integrity
Yea, but Petrino didn't win in Arkansas on the same level Saban has won at Bama/LSU.
How is Chris Petersen on that list, when he hasn't even appeared in a national title game?
He's 42-2 all time with Boise. He built a national power almost by himself.
Key word is almost.
Dan Hawkins built the foundation that Peterson has continued since Hawkins left for Boulder. Hawkins went 53-11 in 5 years, with 4 WAC titles. You could even argue Dirk Koetter, who preceded Hawkins for three years and went 26-10 with 2 WAC titles, also laid some of the groundwork.
Regardless, what Petersen has done is remarkable.
Don't forget, these are players voting. They are probably considering how a coach treats players when voting. I think it goes a long way that Peterson has stayed a BSU and turned down other jobs (unlike Kiffin, one of the other most hated coaches).
He's done the most with the least talent. He turned a borderline commuter school into one of the NCAA's winningest programs in the past decade.
Also, he's turned down offers from other schools has really pledged his allegiance to BSU unlike Kiffin, Mack Brown, Brian Kelley, etc, who left the kids they recruited so they could coach at a historical program.
Yea, but they don't exactly recruit the best kids. They became good by taking the kids in California that had off-field problems so the California schools didn't want them. Not saying he isn't a great coach, but there was some talent they were getting from the coast.
This is awesome:
MWC player on dating Coach's daughter
"Our coaches dictate our whole lives, decide who's playing and who's not, bench you because they didn't like your attitude during a practice ... You name it, they have total authority. I would love to turn the tables and roll past my coach's house one day on a date, with his daughter in the front seat."
One of the questions I found interesting - though hardly surprising when you think about it - is "Is the current Head Coach the same as when the school originally offered you?", with 63% answering "No".
Speaks to the stability we are spoiled by in Blacksburg, but also to the precarious nature of the College Football coaching landscape. I wish there was a follow-up question that gauged how players felt about this, and whether they would have transferred if NCAA rules made it less difficult. But then again, we open up the can of worms regarding the "binding" nature of coaching contracts versus schollies...