The Steroid Leagues

Off Topic
1

my room mate and I were talking over cigars last night, and he posed me an interesting question. Given all the arguments to keep steroids out of sports, whats to say we can keep them in? What i’m talking about here is separate leagues, most likely smaller, consisting of athletes that use steroids.

Let them have their own record books, let their use be controlled, regulated and what not, essentially make a safe environment for these guys or girls. Just think of how exciting it would be to watch a football game where you know every play is going to be run with the upmost intensity, or watching a baseball game like they were played back in the so called “steroid era”.

We can more or less all admit these years were the most exciting to watch. Taking away the legal issues concerning steroids, anyone else care to weigh in?

2

[quote]Mikel0428 wrote:
my room mate and I were talking over cigars last night, and he posed me an interesting question. Given all the arguments to keep steroids out of sports, whats to say we can keep them in? What i’m talking about here is separate leagues, most likely smaller, consisting of athletes that use steroids.

Let them have their own record books, let their use be controlled, regulated and what not, essentially make a safe environment for these guys or girls. Just think of how exciting it would be to watch a football game where you know every play is going to be run with the upmost intensity, or watching a baseball game like they were played back in the so called “steroid era”.

We can more or less all admit these years were the most exciting to watch. Taking away the legal issues concerning steroids, anyone else care to weigh in?[/quote]

Athletes don’t take steroids for the sake of taking steroids. They take it to get an advantage over their competition.

I tend to think that maybe a lot of athletes don’t really know the exact effects of steroids on their body- I’m sure a lot of them think pretty much what the media does- but are willing to “pay the price” in order to be that much better than the competition. A league full of juicers defeats the purpose of juicing, as that clear cut advantage would obviously be gone.

And this is assuming, of course, you can find enough juicers to make a league out of it. It would probably dilute the talent pool so much even steroids wouldn’t make it top-level playing. You’d get a bunch of close-but-not-quite college players taking steroids in order to continue playing, where they would most likely lack a lot of the God-given talent of their naturally-gone-pro teammates (which gives sports many of their shock-and-awe, “how did he do/see that?” plays- a great throw, a clutch shot, etc…).

Plus, it wouldn’t exactly solve juicers trying to sneak into the non-juicing league. The incentive to do so would still be there, and with today’s public view of steroids (many would attribute most, if not all, of a successful athlete’s accomplishments within that league to be due to AAS), I doubt many athletes would want to tarnish their image by competing in a league specifically for 'roiders (“Sure, the kids got game, but he’s on steroids.”).

3

It would be a pretty awful league; a bunch of professional athletes juicing up half the year to try and crank their salaries would burn themselves out and/or die pretty rapidly. Given some of the idiotic behavior of NFL and NBA players when it comes to violence, booze, sex, guns, dogfighting, and gang membership, it seems safe to assume that many of those guys are just too stupid to be allowed easy access to steroids.

There are also legal issues to consider: our country still has a radical puritanical streak when it comes to non-medial drug use, and even the MLB doesn’t have the political clout to get around that. Most of this hypothetical league would spend more time talking to the DOJ than it would playing.

4

This is a pretty interesting topic.

I understand arguments from both sides.

In sports, I see how many consider steroids unfair as most people don’t want to use them and shouldn’t have to, but do get left behind athletically if they don’t, especially on a professional level. Nobody should be forced to inject anything in to their bodies and they shouldn’t have to suffer career wise for choosing to stay natural. I do think steroids should be banned in sports until everyone can collectively decide to use them, though that would render roids useless.

I think steroids are fine for people who want to use them for personal gains at the gym or track or what ever, just as long as their use doesn’t give an unfair advantage in any competition. I don’t personally use them, but I don’t see the point in telling another individual what he can or can’t do with his own body.

The Steroid League would be a good idea as each participant would know what he is up against and the playing field would be equal, but as long as steroids are illegal, i think it is a bad idea.

Drug laws in general are stupid as fuck in my opinion, but the risks of improper use are very real.

people will not be taught how to use them properly as long as they are illegal and bought on the street.

kids will hurt themselves, side effects will remain rampant and the Steroid Leauge would contribute to it. (improper use is a true issue regardless of how you or your friends use)

Unless roids are made legal and sold as OTC supplements with explicit usage instructions such as they are in Mexico, steroids should stay out of sports.

They don’t have any more of a place in athletics than NOS in a race or one basketball team being allowed to travel and the other not.

5

[quote]conner wrote:
Mikel0428 wrote:
my room mate and I were talking over cigars last night, and he posed me an interesting question. Given all the arguments to keep steroids out of sports, whats to say we can keep them in? What i’m talking about here is separate leagues, most likely smaller, consisting of athletes that use steroids.

Let them have their own record books, let their use be controlled, regulated and what not, essentially make a safe environment for these guys or girls. Just think of how exciting it would be to watch a football game where you know every play is going to be run with the upmost intensity, or watching a baseball game like they were played back in the so called “steroid era”.

We can more or less all admit these years were the most exciting to watch. Taking away the legal issues concerning steroids, anyone else care to weigh in?

Athletes don’t take steroids for the sake of taking steroids. They take it to get an advantage over their competition.

I tend to think that maybe a lot of athletes don’t really know the exact effects of steroids on their body- I’m sure a lot of them think pretty much what the media does- but are willing to “pay the price” in order to be that much better than the competition. A league full of juicers defeats the purpose of juicing, as that clear cut advantage would obviously be gone.

And this is assuming, of course, you can find enough juicers to make a league out of it. It would probably dilute the talent pool so much even steroids wouldn’t make it top-level playing. You’d get a bunch of close-but-not-quite college players taking steroids in order to continue playing, where they would most likely lack a lot of the God-given talent of their naturally-gone-pro teammates (which gives sports many of their shock-and-awe, “how did he do/see that?” plays- a great throw, a clutch shot, etc…).

Plus, it wouldn’t exactly solve juicers trying to sneak into the non-juicing league. The incentive to do so would still be there, and with today’s public view of steroids (many would attribute most, if not all, of a successful athlete’s accomplishments within that league to be due to AAS), I doubt many athletes would want to tarnish their image by competing in a league specifically for 'roiders (“Sure, the kids got game, but he’s on steroids.”).
[/quote]

good post.

6

I’ve always thought that everyone (the athletes, the fans, and the league itself) would be happier or better off if the leagues simply legalized steroids and then hired a staff of doctors to monitor and administer the drugs to the players.

It’d be a hell of a lot better than the wink-wink system they’ve got now. It’s also a hell of a lot easier to just let the athletes use the drugs rather than futilely trying to prevent all of them from using.

There’s just that stupid federal law standing in the way…

7

[quote]tGunslinger wrote:
I’ve always thought that everyone (the athletes, the fans, and the league itself) would be happier or better off if the leagues simply legalized steroids and then hired a staff of doctors to monitor and administer the drugs to the players.

It’d be a hell of a lot better than the wink-wink system they’ve got now. It’s also a hell of a lot easier to just let the athletes use the drugs rather than futilely trying to prevent all of them from using.

There’s just that stupid federal law standing in the way…[/quote]

some athletes may not want to alter their body chemistry and should not have to.

this creates a moral situation and steroids would lose any ways.

it would take more than a change in laws to change the general outlook on steroids.

8

[quote]tGunslinger wrote:
I’ve always thought that everyone (the athletes, the fans, and the league itself) would be happier or better off if the leagues simply legalized steroids and then hired a staff of doctors to monitor and administer the drugs to the players.

It’d be a hell of a lot better than the wink-wink system they’ve got now. It’s also a hell of a lot easier to just let the athletes use the drugs rather than futilely trying to prevent all of them from using.

There’s just that stupid federal law standing in the way…[/quote]

As one of the posters mentioned, athletes take steroids to gain an advantage over other athletes. So the Doctors would administer the safe dose, then the athlete would run off and take more (or more dangerous) steroids in secret.

I would say that if there was a steroid that could greatly help you become a champion but would kill you in 15 years, many athletes would still use this steroid (there is actually some research done by psychologists on this, ill try and find the ref).

That is why a ban on steroids in sport makes some sense, if you believe in protecting people from themselves. This is also why a ban steroids in the general public makes little sense.

9

i understand the safety issue with the public and in particular the younger impressionable male demographic that look up to pro athletes as heroes but dammit, when i watch sports i want to be a witness to physical feats normal humans can’t perform.

any fool can hit a home run, any fool can run, but it takes a very special person to hit the score boards or hit it out of the stadium. i say let’s not keep anything performance enhancing away from the the pros. don’t forget that their bodies are for entertainment of the masses, so it is stupid to limit what they need and want so they can be their best. they can certainly afford it and the consequences.

to me, that is what professional sports is all about–outperforming normal human performance. for as long as they have legal limitations on what they can cannot do, they are not going to be ‘real’ professionals. they will just be weaker/slower selves hiding their true potentials as superhuman athletes.

f

10

[quote]florianopolis wrote:
i understand the safety issue with the public and in particular the younger impressionable male demographic that look up to pro athletes as heroes but dammit, when i watch sports i want to be a witness to physical feats normal humans can’t perform.

any fool can hit a home run, any fool can run, but it takes a very special person to hit the score boards or hit it out of the stadium. i say let’s not keep anything performance enhancing away from the the pros. don’t forget that their bodies are for entertainment of the masses, so it is stupid to limit what they need and want so they can be their best. they can certainly afford it and the consequences.

to me, that is what professional sports is all about–outperforming normal human performance. for as long as they have legal limitations on what they can cannot do, they are not going to be ‘real’ professionals. they will just be weaker/slower selves hiding their true potentials as superhuman athletes.

f

[/quote]
it is fun to watch a record break, but i think most people watch sports for the competition in general and incredible feats are bonuses.

non juiced athletes are still pretty impressive. i know you are making a point, but not any fool can hit a home run, run as fast as olympic level runners, jump as high as NBA players etc.

juice is a variable that technically shouldn’t exist and undermines non juicing athletes unfairly.

11

[quote]gotaknife wrote:
…
As one of the posters mentioned, athletes take steroids to gain an advantage over other athletes. So the Doctors would administer the safe dose, then the athlete would run off and take more (or more dangerous) steroids in secret.
…[/quote]

That is why doctors would continue monitoring the athletes. If the doctors find something out of whack with the athlete’s health, they would hold them out of competition.

My method wouldn’t be that all-fired different from what they have now, but there would at least be doctors administering the drugs and monitoring the athletes. Right now, they have under-the-table drug use without any supervision.

The steroid cat is out of the bag and it’s not going back in no matter how illegal you make it. At least not until the testing methods get anywhere close to reliable and comprehensive. Might as well embrace it and bring doctors in to try and keep the athletes as safe as possible rather than just hope the athletes stop taking drugs.

This is all mental masturbation anyhow. This would never be implemented even if steroids were legal.

12

[quote]texasguy wrote:
some athletes may not want to alter their body chemistry and should not have to.

this creates a moral situation and steroids would lose any ways.

it would take more than a change in laws to change the general outlook on steroids. [/quote]

I had figured it went without saying, but drug use would not be mandatory, simply legal.

As I said above, this is just talk anyhow. It won’t happen anytime soon.

13

This hypothetical league of yours must be discrimanatory, then?

What about if an athlete is diabetic? Insulin and IGF are out of the picture for him, but not for other athletes in this league.
There will still be advantages and disadvantages for certain athletes. Everyone will have different hormonal responses to the drugs.

How regulated do you think this can possibly be? Some athletes will obviously take more than what is permitted. The NFL and MLB like to claim they have drug regulation in their leagues and I don’t know how true that is.

14

Just throwin this out there. If people were in it to watch heart, competition and effort, they’d watch highschool football. But its not as fun because they aren’t as good.

15

All Drug Olympics

16

[quote]Taquito wrote:
Just throwin this out there. If people were in it to watch heart, competition and effort, they’d watch highschool football. But its not as fun because they aren’t as good.[/quote]

This is a good point. There are professional sports for no other reason than people are willing to pay money to see elite level athletes play at a level higher than any other.

In order for athletes to continue earning their paycheck, they will take any substance they can to maintain or increase their ability. There is absolutely nothing unfair about it. It’s business.

The hypocrisy of the typical sports fan is mind-numbing.

And let’s not forget that many of the steroids that are being used, especially in contact sports, are more for recovery than running faster, and hitting harder.

A steroid league would not work. There would be no market for it, and you have to have that before any business is going to have even a chance at succeeding.

17

I don’t care is they juice really. Many of them do anyway and the line between legal supplements and steroids is a fuzzy one. Both improve performance to one degree or another.