[META] Drug Cheating: Any recourse?

[Aristotle]

Originally posted by Darion
Well, Bonds tied the record. Does anyone find it ironic that it was off a pitcher who tested positive for steroids in 2005?

I think it just indicates how big the problem is. How many players are left that are unsullied by the whole 'roid scandal? And what is worse: the players that used drugs, or the fact that MLB is just giving everyone a pass?

[Darion]

Originally posted by Aristotle
And what is worse: the players that used drugs, or the fact that MLB is just giving everyone a pass?

I would say 'the pass', but it's cutting off your nose to spite your face at this point. It was given a wink and a nudge throughout the 90s when baseball was enjoying a rise in popularity due to the bombs being dropped by Sosa and McGwire, and now it is epidemic. Not the fault of the players, really, but a simple consequence of how professional sports runs. I outlined my steroid position in the MMA thread, insofar as a massive steroid purge will never happen, because it will require the MLB to act against its own financial best interests.

[Aristotle]

Originally posted by Darion
It was given a wink and a nudge throughout the 90s when baseball was enjoying a rise in popularity due to the bombs being dropped by Sosa and McGwire, and now it is epidemic.

I wonder if it would have made a difference had the 1994 strike not happened. They needed the McGwire/Sosa home run chase to save their butts from the strike season fiasco. Perhaps they would have put a stop to the steroid abuse sooner if they'd never let that idiotic strike ruin the 94 season.

We will never know, but it is interesting to consider.

Originally posted by Darion
I outlined my steroid position in the MMA thread, insofar as a massive steroid purge will never happen, because it will require the MLB to act against its own financial best interests.

I am of the opinion that it would be at worst a short term loss, with a significant long term gain. Sports are a gigantic business, but their entire value hinges upon the shared belief that the results are legitimate.

If the results were perceived to be manipulated, that would open things up to competition from anyone willing to be more creative than the existing sports federations.

I mean, if people started to believe the NFL, MLB, NBA, etc. were basically fixed (through drug use, cheating refs, or whatever), then it would be a lot easier for a competing organization to create their own league and find a way to script more compelling story lines. The whole monopoly they hold relies on the belief that they have the *best* players and completely unpredictible and legitimate results.

That whole house of cards comes tumbling down if enough people start to think the sports are rigged in some way. It could collapse pretty quickly as well.

Oddly, that is exactly what happened to the sport of rowing. It was very popular throughout the 1800s, but rampant cheating and race fixing (due to the influence of gambling) absolutely killed the sport. Obviously, we live in a much different time than the 19th century, but a professional sport CAN be ruined if people stop believing it is legitimate.

[Darion]

I am of the opinion that it would be at worst a short term loss, with a significant long term gain.

What is the long term gain? What is the short term loss?

If the results were perceived to be manipulated, that would open things up to competition from anyone willing to be more creative than the existing sports federations.

I will say that a large part of the appeal of baseball is the idea that the results are legitimate - the randomness inherent in the game is part of the appeal. The games themselves, however, -are- legitimate. Permissive but hush-hush steroid use is a far cry from actually fixing games, and to draw the line is a pretty big step.

Oddly, that is exactly what happened to the sport of rowing. It was very popular throughout the 1800s, but rampant cheating and race fixing (due to the influence of gambling) absolutely killed the sport. Obviously, we live in a much different time than the 19th century, but a professional sport CAN be ruined if people stop believing it is legitimate.

Sure, if it was uncovered that the MLB was actually fixing games then I am willing to bet that the sport would take a HUGE hit - but that is not actually occurring.

[Aristotle]

(This has become a big enough tangent that I should split this thread off from the MLB Catch All thread.)

Originally posted by Darion
What is the long term gain? What is the short term loss?

The short term loss would be things like slowly declining ratings when people are at first disenchanted by less impressive statistics. This is worse in baseball than other sports, but it would probably have some effect in any sport. But the thing is, ultimately, when everyone's juiced up performance is taken down a notch, overall stats (offense vs. defense) will retain general parity. I think the sports could easily rebound from such short term losses.

In some sports, there could be both short term AND long term gains. I believe one of the biggest reasons the NFL is so tremendously injury plagued is a result of the massive roid abuse. There absolutely should not be 275 pound defensive ends running 4.4 forty yard dashes and bench pressing Mack Trucks. This is a big reason so many QBs and RBs get absolutely demolished.

The long term potential loss is the absolute end to the sport when it teeters over the edge into feeling like WWE. That is an absolutely critical precipice for professional sports.

Right up until it goes over that edge, everything will be totally fine. But the moment a critical mass is reached of people who think the results are not legit, the sport will die a horrible death. It hasn't happened to any of the big 4 because they are well aware of this fact.

[Darion]

But the thing is, ultimately, when everyone's juiced up performance is taken down a notch, overall stats (offense vs. defense) will retain general parity. I think the sports could easily rebound from such short term losses.

I agree with the comment about maintaining general parity. Really, the MLB has other ways of padding stats that are perfectly acceptable - being generous with assigning a hit as a hit rather than a defensive throwing/fielding error (you see this all the time), stressing OBP as opposed to BA, so on, so on...

You've identified the drawback to instituting a massive steroid crackdown. By crackdown, I do not neccessarily mean a 100% test of every member of the league, but MUCH stiffer penalties for popping hot on a drug test and a much more equitable testing system that does not discriminate against career double-A guys as opposed to lifetime Majors players.

Declining ratings, though, is not a short term problem - look at the NHL. It never rebounded from the strike, and now I would hardly consider it one of the 'Big Four' that you mentioned later in your post (I assume you were referring to MLB, NFL, NBA, and NHL). A lack of interest in a sport can simply kill a league.

I believe one of the biggest reasons the NFL is so tremendously injury plagued is a result of the massive roid abuse.

Really? I would have said it's the fact that the average NFL lineman is essentially suffering a car crash's worth of impact every time the ball is snapped.

The long term potential loss is the absolute end to the sport when it teeters over the edge into feeling like WWE. That is an absolutely critical precipice for professional sports.

I do not agree that steroid use is going to lead to the scripting of MLB, NFL, or what-have-you in the same manner as the WWE is faked up, though I do agree that such a thing would generally be the end of that particular sport. I'm just saying that the step from saucing to Lou Pinella hitting an umpire with a folding chair is a pretty big stretch. Well, maybe not for Lou, but you get the idea.

[Aristotle]

NOTE: For simplicity, I use "roids" as a catch all for steroids, HGH, stimulants, and all other banned or illegal performance enhancing drugs.

Originally posted by Darion

Really? I would have said it's the fact that the average NFL lineman is essentially suffering a car crash's worth of impact every time the ball is snapped.

For linemen, yes, but keep in mind one of the reasons that impact is so tremendous is partially from the roided up players smashing into each other. Even the roids the o-linemen are using plays a role in the total impact force being generated.

But people don't tend to have a favorite o-linemen they go to the game to see. The players most folks watch are the skill positions - QB, RB, WR, LB, etc., and I think one of the big reasons those folks are getting injured more than ever is roids. Not only the roids used by the people smashing into them, but the roids they use themselves which puts a lot of strain on their joints and ligaments (since their muscle growth often outpaces ligament and joint strengthening).

Originally posted by Darion

I do not agree that steroid use is going to lead to the scripting of MLB, NFL, or what-have-you in the same manner as the WWE is faked up, though I do agree that such a thing would generally be the end of that particular sport. I'm just saying that the step from saucing to Lou Pinella hitting an umpire with a folding chair is a pretty big stretch. Well, maybe not for Lou, but you get the idea.

I don't know. I am certainly not saying it is GOING to happen (roids single handedly destroying the legitimacy of pro sports), but I do think it is possible. What is more likely is that roids could be one significant part of a suite of problems that bring down a pro sport. Add roid abuse to cheating refs, wife abusing players, rapists, dog fighters, gambling abuses, point shaving, suspicious rulings to help teams that got new stadiums from their cities, weird scheduling moves or umpiring that seems to push more series' to 6-7 games, etc. and you may start to have a very real, very significant problem.

But then again, look at what roids are doing to cycling. It is tough to make a comparison, since cycling was never much more than Lance Armstrong, but there is definitely a lesson to be learned there. We have not reached it yet in the big 3 sports (NFL, NBA, MLB), but I think there is some boundary beyond which people will not accept further pollution by performance enhancing drugs. The legitimacy of performance and results can only be threatened so much before people's interest will fade irretrievably.

[Darion]

The players most folks watch are the skill positions - QB, RB, WR, LB, etc., and I think one of the big reasons those folks are getting injured more than ever is roids. Not only the roids used by the people smashing into them, but the roids they use themselves which puts a lot of strain on their joints and ligaments (since their muscle growth often outpaces ligament and joint strengthening).

I'll buy this as a common sense sort of thing, even though the statistics are not provable. The bottom line, however, is that a player is not going to go play in the NFL for 20 years and not come out with totally messed up joints, not even at a skill position (excepting kickers, of course).

What is more likely is that roids could be one significant part of a suite of problems that bring down a pro sport. Add roid abuse to cheating refs, wife abusing players, rapists, dog fighters, gambling abuses, point shaving, suspicious rulings to help teams that got new stadiums from their cities, weird scheduling moves or umpiring that seems to push more series' to 6-7 games, etc. and you may start to have a very real, very significant problem.

This right here is actually a good argument -against- a steroid purge in professional sports, and I tend to agree. Steroids themselves are not capable of tainting a league to the point where its financial viability collapses, but as a single problem present within a host of other problems, that possibility can arise.

Really, my argument is that steroids are entrenched in professional sports and to remove them would be extremely difficult and generally undesirable from a commercial standpoint. It would make great sense, however, for sports to crack down on the other particulars that you mentioned (which is beginning to happen), thus the worst-case-scenario never actually comes to fruition.

[Aristotle]

Yeah, the inherent problem is that the "drug war" is almost unwinnable. As far as I know, they still don't have a test for HGH. Then there are all these weird analyses they do to try and figure out if your testosterone levels are too high. They basically just have to compare you to what they THINK is a typical value, and punish you if you exceed this.

My pair partner when I was on the national team (rowing) was a guy with an absolutely outrageous VO2 max. He kept at the sport after I retired to go to law school, and eventually made 2 olympic teams. He had to voluntarily submit to an incredible frequency of blood testing in order to prove that his own natural blood oxygenation levels were legit. The guy was just physically gifted, and had to have blood tests done 30-40 times per year to justify it. They just don't have any real way to test for blood doping, so its all educated guesswork based on "typical" statistics.

By the same token, I would still love to see extremely harsh penalties for when they DO catch people. And as you have alluded to in previous posts, I want to see the big boys getting rocked - not just the peons.

Perhaps I never understood your exact point from the beginning. Is your point something more akin to this:

"The efforts and methods you would have to take to completely purge roid use from sports would have to be so extreme, intrusive, draconian, and outrageous that it would harm the sport worse than the actual abuse of roids harmed it."

I can certainly see the merits of that point.

[Darion]

Originally posted by Aristotle
Perhaps I never understood your exact point from the beginning. Is your point something more akin to this:

"The efforts and methods you would have to take to completely purge roid use from sports would have to be so extreme, intrusive, draconian, and outrageous that it would harm the sport worse than the actual abuse of roids harmed it."

I can certainly see the merits of that point.

You have already outlined the difficulty of actually testing for some steroids with a minimal margin of error - it is not possible. My original point (I think I might have actually outlined it more in-depth in the MMA thread) was that actually instituting a steroid crackdown is a net loss in terms of a league's worth, so policymakers for that league would never do it.

That having been said, if a draconian, intrusive, outrageous method to test for most known steroids was without error for the most part, I would say go for it and the players can consider it a cost of doing business in the bigs. I am not pro-steroids and neither are the leagues (despite the permissiveness), but I recognize the impossibility of removing them from professional sports in this day and age.