A (moderate) defense of Brian Cushing
by On the Banks on May 12, 2010 6:00 PM EDT
Email
PrintSeveral days ago, it came out that Brian Cushing of the Houston Texans tested positive for a banned substance last year, and would be suspended for the first four games of the 2010 season. Over the weekend, the Associated Press voted to strip Cushing of his defensive rookie of the year award, and conduct a revote. On Monday, ESPN's Adam Schefter reported that the positive test for hCG occurred last September.
Yes, Cushing was linked to using performance enhancing drugs all through his tenure at USC, and even going back to when he was roaming the sidelines for Bergen Catholic. I'll even readily concede that the preponderance of evidence suggests steroids. That doesn't mean that it is fair to strip this award, or shun him as a pariah. There's still no conclusive proof of usage, and all banned substances are hardly created equal when ephedra and diuretics are treated the same as anabolic steroids and human growth hormone.
Football is not analogous to baseball in this respect. The use of performance enhancing drugs in football is regarded as far more common than in baseball, that very fact generally drawing a collective shrug from fans and the media. Cushing is hardly the only Bergen County football star from that era alleged to have been a user (it's not necessarily who you'd always think either). No one has any room to throw stones here. Football's statistical records are hardly regarded as sacrosanct, and no one has definitively verified what exactly are the effects of substance use in the sport.
The drugs may well make you a better player, but there has to be some underlying talent and drive. They're not a panacea. Vernon Gholston's physique is as sculpted as it gets, but he's tasked with putting on pads and beating offensive tackles, not winning a body building contest. NFL teams certainly had to be aware of the years of speculation here, and Brian Cushing still went in the first round last year. Colleges knew of the rumors too, and nearly every single one still would have happily taken his name on a signed letter of intent. It can't all be steroids.
Brian Cushing isn't the first NFL star to be linked to steroids, and he certainly will not be the last. Regardless of what the Associated Press ends up doing, it's safe to venture that these allegations will fade with time. He'll surely have a long and successful career.
3 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Cushing
Your argument on defending Cushing is laughable. You correctly start out by saying that steroids in football is treated differently than in baseball. Nobody cares who has the NFL record for tackles in a season, but everyone knows the major baseball records. However, for you to go on saying that you still need talent to play in the NFL is stating the obvious. However, a talented player using PEDs all of a sudden becomes a Star. Then you state that the NFL teams knew about the rumors and Houston still took him in the 1st round. What does that prove??? Bonds and Canseco took steroids and everyone knew it and teams were more than happy to have them as long as they can produce. As soon as they stop producing (or stop taking steroids) then they are no longer wanted. And as for colleges wanting him to sign the letter of intent, same stupid argument. Colleges will look the other way until said player gets caught. That still is no reason for making excuses for a drug user. Too many players that are PED-free are lumped together as if its a level playing field. When HS players see a NJ juiced up freak make the NFL, then these kids want to hit the lottery and be a millionaire too. 4 games is nothing. Back acne is no big deal and future health problems for a 16 yr old kid is light years away. Steroids, HGH, and other PEDs unfortunatley work (short-term), and just because a Shawn Merriman is not looked at as a pariah as a Bonds is should not make it alright. And you close your Defense by saying that Cushing will probably have a long and successful career. Remember, Alzado had a long and succesful career too. However, his life was short and tragic.
Not to pile on, but I agree with Shore this is pretty poor.
That doesn’t mean that it is fair to strip this award, or shun him as a pariah. There’s still no conclusive proof of usage, and all banned substances are hardly created equal when ephedra and diuretics are treated the same as anabolic steroids and human growth hormone.
They are, in fact, all created equal in the sense that they are all illegal. Cheating a medium amount instead of a large amount does not make you some kind of victim because someone else cheated more than you. You are a cheater, and should be labeled as such.
And your suggestion that we all forget about it and move on, allowing cheaters to have successful careers is also troublesome. How about, instead of dismissing this because “everyone does it,” we make a really big deal out of this and change the culture so we no longer effectively encourage 15-year-old kids to take drugs that will fuck them up for the rest of their lives. That seems like a much more nobel goal than ragging on the AP for actually exposing a guy who knew exactly what he was doing, has been doing it for 6+ years, and finally got caught.
I know about your diabolical plan.
I haven't even read this post.
I will, but just for the record: I don’t see how anyone can possibly defend any of this.
I know about your diabolical plan.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
