Espn: Upshaw doesn't want steroid "witch hunt" in NFL

[AbeBeta]

Don't the players know exactly what date the test is given?

Steroid testing is random. Something like 4 players on each team are selected each week. Players may be tested up to 6 times in the off-season as well. I think if you have a positive test once, then you are tested weekly from there on out.

From a probabilistic standpoint, if there are cheaters, you will nail a proportion roughly equal to the proportion of players using with the random testing

 

[5Stars]

Many surgeries are detrimental to a player's long term health. Are you going to ban arthroscopic procedures that get the player back on the field while sacrificing functioning later in life?

Well, if you are trying to save an injury, I guess...?

But, allowing something to harm you in the first place seems very odd! Roids should be used in very small amounts...they have a purpose...

 

[AbeBeta]

There is a rule in the books against steroid use and not one against draining your knees or fusing your vertebrae.

And there is a rule on the book constituting how you test for steroid use.

Check Mate.

 

[WoodysGirl]

Don't the players know exactly what date the test is given?

No. There was an article I posted a while back about how inviolate those tests are on the player. From what I understand during the season, a certain amount of players are tested every week, but they don't know who until the day of. If you're in the program it can be any day or hour of the week.

I'm not sure about the offseason, but what was emphasized was that it was random.

 

[Aikbach]

And there is a rule on the book constituting how you test for steroid use.

Check Mate.

But every year revisions are made to the rules and when one is so blatantly violated year after year it is time to take a look at some changes.

You must have been playing checkers while I was playing chess, sorry but no check for you.

 

[5Stars]

Upshaw may not be the most eloquent of men, but I think the point he's making is that they have a system that is used to test for drugs and if that system is to be modified, then it needs to be done through negotiation between the league and the players union. That's why the CBA is in place.

I didn't take him to mean that he didn't care if their were abusers, just that they have a system in place and the players he represent have to approve any changes regarding the policy.

That is his job...

 

[sago1]

Seems to me that the NFL with NFLPA concurrence is working on new rules regarding the disciplining of players who have engaged in various differing activities to the detriment of the NFL. Without knowing the exact wording, if information from this steriod investigation identifies many/certain players as individuals who purchased. sold or were administered steriod products, a firestorm would erupt to such an extent that action would have to be taken or else Congress could get involved. Now I don't want Congress to be involved, but certain the NFL could find itself called on the carpet if they fail to act and if Upshaw or the NFL owners fail to act.

 

[AbeBeta]

But every year revisions are made to the rules and when one is so blatantly violated year after year it is time to take a look at some changes.

You must have been playing checkers while I was playing chess, sorry but no check for you.

How can you be sure the rule is being "blantantly" violated? There would be FAR more positive tests if this was the case. Far far more. Simple probability.

 

[5Stars]

Steroid testing is random. Something like 4 players on each team are selected each week. Players may be tested up to 6 times in the off-season as well. I think if you have a positive test once, then you are tested weekly from there on out.

From a probabilistic standpoint, if there are cheaters, you will nail a proportion roughly equal to the proportion of players using with the random testing

Why risk those odds!


Stay clean...no worries!

 

[theogt]

How can you be sure the rule is being "blantantly" violated? There would be FAR more positive tests if this was the case. Far far more. Simple probability.

There should be, provided there is no manipulation.

 

[WoodysGirl]

That is his job...

So what's the beef if he's only doing his job?

 

[5Stars]

There should be, provided there is no manipulation.

c:


Are you sure?

I'm gonna look this up!

 

[5Stars]

So what's the beef if he's only doing his job?

Nothing...he's looking out for the players, that is his job. However, sometimes things need to change on both sides...it's his responsibilty! Not mine!

 

[Rockytop6]

Some of you folks. I just don't understand your problem. The CBA says positive test. Upshaw's job is to make sure that agreement is held. If the league was so damn concerned then put it in the freaking CBA. Some of you just want an excuse to bash Upshaw.

I am not an Upshaw fan at all. I would not cry if he were removed. That being said, I agree with his position. How can you discipline somebody if they are only "linked" and there is no evidence of wrong doing? I thought in this country you are still innocent until "proven" guilty.

If the testing procedure in place, which seems to be rather stringent, isn't sufficent then upgrade the procedure. However, I would never discipline a player on suspicion or imagination as you read sometimes on this board.

Kill Upshaw if you want to but don't hang everybody caught up in a witch hunt. I support his position. I want strict discipline for everybody that is found guilty (evidence) but not on anything subjective or suspicion.

 

[jimmy40]

I am not an Upshaw fan at all. I would not cry if he were removed. That being said, I agree with his position. How can you discipline somebody if they are only "linked" and there is no evidence of wrong doing? I thought in this country you are still innocent until "proven" guilty.

If the testing procedure in place, which seems to be rather stringent, isn't sufficent then upgrade the procedure. However, I would never discipline a player on suspicion or imagination as you read sometimes on this board.

Kill Upshaw if you want to but don't hang everybody caught up in a witch hunt. I support his position. I want strict discipline for everybody that is found guilty (evidence) but not on anything subjective or suspicion.

If a player is proven to have bought cocain should the NFL do anything about it if he doesn't fail a drug test?

 

[5Stars]

I am not an Upshaw fan at all. I would not cry if he were removed. That being said, I agree with his position. How can you discipline somebody if they are only "linked" and there is no evidence of wrong doing? I thought in this country you are still innocent until "proven" guilty.

If the testing procedure in place, which seems to be rather stringent, isn't sufficent then upgrade the procedure. However, I would never discipline a player on suspicion or imagination as you read sometimes on this board.

Kill Upshaw if you want to but don't hang everybody caught up in a witch hunt. I support his position. I want strict discipline for everybody that is found guilty (evidence) but not on anything subjective or suspicion.

Well stated...

 

[WoodysGirl]

If a player is proven to have bought cocain should the NFL do anything about it if he doesn't fail a drug test?

I don't know the drug policy language, but I think if it's "proven" then that would seem to fall under both the drug policy and personal conduct policies that are in place and the player would be disciplined accordingly.

 

[burmafrd]

Instead of a 4 game suspension any player that tests positive for steroids needs to be suspended for the rest of the year. Then for the next 2 years weekly tests- for the entire year!! ANd a second positive test would result in a 16 game suspension. Third test is lifetime ban.

 

[AbeBeta]

If a player is proven to have bought cocain should the NFL do anything about it if he doesn't fail a drug test?

did any of these players get arrested for their purchase of steroids? that's what you would need for proof

 

[Aikbach]

did any of these players get arrested for their purchase of steroids? that's what you would need for proof

Just because a substance is not altogether illegal to possess as an American citizen doesn't mean it can't be banned by an organization just as it is legal to own firearms and illegal to tote them around in airports and schools.

Have steroids but don't use them while playing pro football.