Antonio Gates Suspended

[amfootball]

double post.

[amfootball]

My personal thought on this issue is that I want to see what can be accomplished within the constraints of the natural human body pushed to its limits through training, determination and skill development.  

 

When we use chemicals to push the body beyond what it can naturally endure (which includes pain control), we also naturally subject it to greater destruction.  Bigger muscles on normal tendons bring tears.  Rage brought on by steroid or other hormone use creates a potentially out of control player that can damage other players because he is less able to recognize and control his own emotions.  

 

I do not think that Gates should have been allowed to play with his Plantar Faciatis (foot injury) when he was in such pain that it required massive shots to get him through a game and a week of torture to semi-recover.  

 

I want to see players have as long of a career as possible, not a short flame out or blip of greatness.  Unnatural substances are not likely to produce that result.   

There is no bigger competitive advantage in all of sports than those that take PEDs. Jose Canseco said he would have made the pros without them. I remember your guy Shawn Merriman being a shadow of himself after he was busted for roids and had to remain clean. It is without a doubt the biggest stain on pro and international sports since the 80's. And unfortunately the industry will only grow.

[FanFromtheWasteland]

Yeah, that man turned to shambles in quite horrific fashion.

There are numerous examples of people suffering quite greatly after abusing steroids. Lyle was one of my favorite defenders back in the day, and I was crushed to learn about steroids. Even more so due to the way we learned about it.

I really don't understand the blaghzay(sp?) attitude that people have about something so harmful. There are tremendous complaints about steriods in the food we eat but it should be ok for athletes if it means they win? Pathetic if you ask me.

[ColtsBlueFL]

I really don't understand the blaghzay(sp?) attitude that people have about something so harmful. There are tremendous complaints about steriods in the food we eat but it should be ok for athletes if it means they win? Pathetic if you ask me.

 

It does appear many to have a blase' or laissez-faire attitude in regards to steroids.  But it is likely only because the use is rampant in all sports.  We have even found it in the ones we never expected, like (to me) soccer!  But from cycling to baseball, all the way to the NFL, athletes looking to either just make it in to the elite club, hang on to their Pro status, or jump from great to GOAT, that method has provided them the way.  So much so, it just appears to be everyone else could not care any  less.  Indeed, many here don't mind, especially if it makes their sports hero even better.  Yet, there is still the stigma of having the S word attached their suspension, so the Athlete now blames Adderall for his PED failing.  That won't work in the off season anymore though.

 

Other countries aren't as strict as the U.S. on them, so there is that issue as well.  So the movement there might be like the momentum of Marijuana in the NFL is getting, leniency leaning toward eventual legality within the sport, as described here-

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmith/2012/08/24/why-its-time-to-legalize-steroids-in-professional-sports/

 

I do think we would need a law change in the U.S. on these before I would endorse the small amounts of Steroids for personal use mantra etc...

[Superman]

I really don't understand the blaghzay(sp?) attitude that people have about something so harmful. There are tremendous complaints about steriods in the food we eat but it should be ok for athletes if it means they win? Pathetic if you ask me.

 

The truth is that steroids aren't necessarily "so harmful." Some of them are super hardcore and nothing nice, and even if not, they can be abused like anything else, but they can also be used responsibly, and often are. There are a lot of substances that are banned by different sports leagues as being performance enhancers that the typical person uses on a daily basis.

 

The stigma attached to steroids and other performance enhancers has gotten out of control, and no one is willing to recalibrate the conversation to acknowledge that "steroids are bad!" is an out of date and narrow minded point of view. Because of that stigma, steroids and HGH -- which are widely used in medicine -- are labeled PEDs, which is a term that isn't even used outside of sports. There's an arbitrary line that's been drawn between PEDs and medicine, and it's only holding back progress. 

[amfootball]

The truth is that steroids aren't necessarily "so harmful." Some of them are super hardcore and nothing nice, and even if not, they can be abused like anything else, but they can also be used responsibly, and often are. There are a lot of substances that are banned by different sports leagues as being performance enhancers that the typical person uses on a daily basis.

 

The stigma attached to steroids and other performance enhancers has gotten out of control, and no one is willing to recalibrate the conversation to acknowledge that "steroids are bad!" is an out of date and narrow minded point of view. Because of that stigma, steroids and HGH -- which are widely used in medicine -- are labeled PEDs, which is a term that isn't even used outside of sports. There's an arbitrary line that's been drawn between PEDs and medicine, and it's only holding back progress. 

Yes, good points here but I don't believe the general public views steroids as bad outside of a sports environment. Several friends of mine have had steroids given to their kids for poison ivy and asthma. I never think of that in the realm of Arod or Bonds. As with anything, intent is paramount.

[Superman]

Yes, good points here but I don't believe the general public views steroids as bad outside of a sports environment. Several friends of mine have had steroids given to their kids for poison ivy and asthma. I never think of that in the realm of Arod or Bonds. As with anything, intent is paramount.

 

The intent is muscle recovery, often to aid recovery after injury or surgery. There's really nothing nefarious about that.

 

Steroids are only considered bad for athletes. That makes very little sense.

[amfootball]

The intent is muscle recovery, often to aid recovery after injury or surgery. There's really nothing nefarious about that.

 

Steroids are only considered bad for athletes. That makes very little sense.

Sure, sometimes it is for that. Other times it is for performance. I do agree though that drugs that help in the aid in recovery should be looked at more closely. IMO that is a win/win for everyone as the team and the fans want their players back on the field or court as soon as possible.

[Superman]

Sure, sometimes it is for that. Other times it is for performance. I do agree though that drugs that help in the aid in recovery should be looked at more closely. IMO that is a win/win for everyone as the team and the fans want their players back on the field or court as soon as possible.

 

Athletes train and lift weights and practice for hours and hours to improve their performance. There's nothing nefarious about that intention, either. You can take protein and aminos and a bunch of other stuff -- much of it synthesized -- to increase your gains in the weight room, and no one cares. It's all about getting bigger, faster and stronger, and those advances are a big part of the reason the athletes of today are so physically superior to those of previous generations.

 

But if a substance is labeled a "performance enhancer" -- which is a term that is only used in sports, not education, not the corporate world, etc. -- then it's considered cheating. People largely don't even care that it's unsafe, it's just that we've decided athletes aren't supposed to use PEDs, so when they do, it's a problem. And that's an arbitrary designation that really doesn't mean anything, when the only real distinction should be between what is and isn't medically safe and legal. 

 

I'm certainly not arguing that it's fine for players to do whatever they want without regard for the rules or the law, but pro sports are missing the point right now when it comes to PEDs.

[amfootball]

Athletes train and lift weights and practice for hours and hours to improve their performance. There's nothing nefarious about that intention, either. You can take protein and aminos and a bunch of other stuff -- much of it synthesized -- to increase your gains in the weight room, and no one cares. It's all about getting bigger, faster and stronger, and those advances are a big part of the reason the athletes of today are so physically superior to those of previous generations.

 

But if a substance is labeled a "performance enhancer" -- which is a term that is only used in sports, not education, not the corporate world, etc. -- then it's considered cheating. People largely don't even care that it's unsafe, it's just that we've decided athletes aren't supposed to use PEDs, so when they do, it's a problem. And that's an arbitrary designation that really doesn't mean anything, when the only real distinction should be between what is and isn't medically safe and legal. 

 

I'm certainly not arguing that it's fine for players to do whatever they want without regard for the rules or the law, but pro sports are missing the point right now when it comes to PEDs.

I see what you are saying. You are talking about how the sports leagues talk about steroid use. I think it is a fine line to be frank. I think much of the verbiage is because of the abusers - Alzato, Jose Canseco, etc. So that has maybe colored the dialog. I actually wonder how it all may have been viewed had Congress never gotten involved with baseball. IMO that is what blew the steroid talk way out of the park.

 

It is interesting to me that no one much cares about roid use in football because the mentality is so different. In baseball the records are sacred so somehow those roid pumpers are viewed much differently than their counterparts in the NFL or even the NBA.

 

And for fans, any insinuation of PED use which is a very broad category of drugs is viewed in the same light a Alzato and Canseco. It is unfortunately but I do think baseball in particular is trying to rebuild its image and integrity and that is what is driving the rhetoric.

[Superman]

I see what you are saying. You are talking about how the sports leagues talk about steroid use. I think it is a fine line to be frank. I think much of the verbiage is because of the abusers - Alzato, Jose Canseco, etc. So that has maybe colored the dialog. I actually wonder how it all may have been viewed had Congress never gotten involved with baseball. IMO that is what blew the steroid talk way out of the park.

 

It is interesting to me that no one much cares about roid use in football because the mentality is so different. In baseball the records are sacred so somehow those roid pumpers are viewed much differently than their counterparts in the NFL or even the NBA.

 

And for fans, any insinuation of PED use which is a very broad category of drugs is viewed in the same light a Alzato and Canseco. It is unfortunately but I do think baseball in particular is trying to rebuild its image and integrity and that is what is driving the rhetoric.

 

Baseball could have simply started testing and suspending violators way back when, and their image wouldn't have been tainted the way it was. The problem is that their sport was dying, and Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Barry Bonds and others were saving the game. So do you celebrate McGwire's 70, and then suspend him for steroids? They didn't want to know.

[southwest1]

I like Gates & I always have. This PED infraction of his part does not diminish or tarnish my opinion of him 1 bit. He's still 1 remarkable TE to watch every Sunday to me. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

Athletes train and lift weights and practice for hours and hours to improve their performance. There's nothing nefarious about that intention, either. You can take protein and aminos and a bunch of other stuff -- much of it synthesized -- to increase your gains in the weight room, and no one cares. It's all about getting bigger, faster and stronger, and those advances are a big part of the reason the athletes of today are so physically superior to those of previous generations.

 

But if a substance is labeled a "performance enhancer" -- which is a term that is only used in sports, not education, not the corporate world, etc. -- then it's considered cheating. People largely don't even care that it's unsafe, it's just that we've decided athletes aren't supposed to use PEDs, so when they do, it's a problem. And that's an arbitrary designation that really doesn't mean anything, when the only real distinction should be between what is and isn't medically safe and legal. 

 

I'm certainly not arguing that it's fine for players to do whatever they want without regard for the rules or the law, but pro sports are missing the point right now when it comes to PEDs.

 

We would like tho think only pro athletes would be the ones using them, and they would use ones that have been well tested or developed with human use in mind .  But, unfortunately neither is the case.  Here's a list of popular steroids- some of which were not even developed for human use (veterinary applications).  And these aren't just for student athlete at the collegiate level, they are also teen athletes.  As long as the FDA and USDEA consider them Schedule III controlled substances (2/27/1991), there's not only a Rx needed, but extra controls applied on top of that.  Yet, the black/Grey market still provides a way for some of these drugs never intended for muscle recovery in humans, but animals-  That is still where the majority are sourced from.  Vet drugs from countries where no Rx is needed.  Here's the list of side effects-

 

Long-term

• Blood clotting difficulties
• Heart attacks
• Clotting disorders
• Cardiovascular, liver, and reproductive organ damage
• Premature heart attacks and strokes
• Reduced sexual functioning
• Stunted growth in adolescents
• Increased chance of injuring ligaments, tendons and muscles
• When injecting: bacterial infections, abscesses, cellulitis, and HIV/AIDS
• Increase in muscle size

 

Many young athletes do not want to take them, yet in order to compete against other athletes on their journey to the pros, they feel pressured.  Some give in, others do not.  It's not all about recovery, often its about becoming better than the next guy, even when both are healthy. The playing field isn't alwysa level, and the is what the NFL preaches.

 

http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ConsumerUpdates/ucm373014.htm

http://www.drugfreesport.com/newsroom/insight.asp?VolID=46&TopicID=7

 

FDA hasn't approved anabolic steroid for too many things, but some physicians prescribe them for off label purposes.  But that doesn't mean they pass the NFL banned list either.  It's not a cut and dried position, on either side.

[Superman]

We would like tho think only pro athletes would be the ones using them, and they would use ones that have been well tested or developed with human use in mind .  But, unfortunately neither is the case.  Here's a list of popular steroids- some of which were not even developed for human use (veterinary applications).  And these aren't just for student athlete at the collegiate level, they are also teen athletes.  As long as the FDA and USDEA consider them Schedule III controlled substances (2/27/1991), there's not only a Rx needed, but extra controls applied on top of that.  Yet, the black/Grey market still provides a way for some of these drugs never intended for muscle recovery in humans, but animals-  That is still where the majority are sourced from.  Vet drugs from countries where no Rx is needed.  Here's the list of side effects-

 

Long-term

• Blood clotting difficulties
• Heart attacks
• Clotting disorders
• Cardiovascular, liver, and reproductive organ damage
• Premature heart attacks and strokes
• Reduced sexual functioning
• Stunted growth in adolescents
• Increased chance of injuring ligaments, tendons and muscles
• When injecting: bacterial infections, abscesses, cellulitis, and HIV/AIDS
• Increase in muscle size

 

Many young athletes do not want to take them, yet in order to compete against other athletes on their journey to the pros, they feel pressured.  Some give in, others do not.  It's not all about recovery, often its about becoming better than the next guy, even when both are healthy. The playing field isn't alwysa level, and the is what the NFL preaches.

 

http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ConsumerUpdates/ucm373014.htm

http://www.drugfreesport.com/newsroom/insight.asp?VolID=46&TopicID=7

 

FDA hasn't approved anabolic steroid for too many things, but some physicians prescribe them for off label purposes.  But that doesn't mean they pass the NFL banned list either.  It's not a cut and dried position, on either side.

 

Definitely not cut and dried, and I hope no one got the impression that I think only pro athletes use them. I'm also not suggesting that people should just do what they want, without regard for rules, law or safety.

 

However, athletics is the only field in which "performance enhancers" are considered cheating. If a high schooler aces his SATs, they don't dock him if they find out he was using Adderall when he was prepping. If a man uses blue pills in the bedroom, his partner doesn't call him a cheater (even if he might be embarrassed by it). 

 

And steroids aren't the only thing athletes might take that have dangerous side effects. Diuretics, supplements, etc., all have potential drawbacks. I'm not trying to act like they should all just be allowed, no matter what. I'm saying that the conversations and guidelines are past due for a change from being about enhancement and integrity and all that stuff, to being about safety and reasonable use.

[ColtsBlueFL]

Definitely not cut and dried, and I hope no one got the impression that I think only pro athletes use them. I'm also not suggesting that people should just do what they want, without regard for rules, law or safety.

 

However, athletics is the only field in which "performance enhancers" are considered cheating. If a high schooler aces his SATs, they don't dock him if they find out he was using Adderall when he was prepping. If a man uses blue pills in the bedroom, his partner doesn't call him a cheater (even if he might be embarrassed by it). 

 

And steroids aren't the only thing athletes might take that have dangerous side effects. Diuretics, supplements, etc., all have potential drawbacks. I'm not trying to act like they should all just be allowed, no matter what. I'm saying that the conversations and guidelines are past due for a change from being about enhancement and integrity and all that stuff, to being about safety and reasonable use.

 

Most definitely items to ponder.  I do need to point out there is a faction out there against mental enhancement via chemistry, for ethical reasons.

 

Safe and legal smart drugs have come to market.  Students (of course) love them and feel it is not cheating.  Some major universities are not so sure and are still reviewing the situation-

 

http://www.brainreport.info/is-using-legal-smart-drugs-to-crush-exams-cheating/

 

It is worth noting that until Early 1991, anabolic steroids were non schedule drugs controlled by state law.  The FDA / USDEA changed that a little less than 15 years ago, and the International Olympic Committee banned them in the mid 1970's

[Jhaze55]

Yes, good points here but I don't believe the general public views steroids as bad outside of a sports environment. Several friends of mine have had steroids given to their kids for poison ivy and asthma. I never think of that in the realm of Arod or Bonds. As with anything, intent is paramount.

You're thinking of a different kind of steroids. The ones that were given to kids to treat poison ivy and asthma are Corticosteroids, and are only used for allergies and things asthma, like you said. They don't give any "performance enhancing" effects that I know of.

 

Anabolic steroids are the ones you associate with Arod and Bonds.

 

 http://arthritis.about.com/od/steroids/f/anabolicsteroid.htm

 

Here's a link if you want to know any more. Sorry, I had to nerd out a bit. There's a huge difference in the effects of the two. 

[amfootball]

Baseball could have simply started testing and suspending violators way back when, and their image wouldn't have been tainted the way it was. The problem is that their sport was dying, and Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Barry Bonds and others were saving the game. So do you celebrate McGwire's 70, and then suspend him for steroids? They didn't want to know.

Yes. Baseball is in a quagmire of its own doing. They ignored the issue forever and then when they were finally faced with it, Congress is involved and its players are no longer hall worthy. It is real shame as I grew up in the 80's so all my memories of baseball are this stigmatized era.

 

How do you feel about the hall of fame? Should these players be kept out forever? Have their own special place in the hall where it is noted they used steroids?

[amfootball]

You're thinking of a different kind of steroids. The ones that were given to kids to treat poison ivy and asthma are Corticosteroids, and are only used for allergies and things asthma, like you said. They don't give any "performance enhancing" effects that I know of.

 

Anabolic steroids are the ones you associate with Arod and Bonds.

 

 http://arthritis.about.com/od/steroids/f/anabolicsteroid.htm

 

Here's a link if you want to know any more. Sorry, I had to nerd out a bit. There's a huge difference in the effects of the two. 

Yes, thanks for posting that. I was more talking about the categorization of the drugs. When I hear the word "steroids" associated with sports I think of the anabolic ones but when I hear it used in the medical field, I think of the corticosteroids. But of course there is a lot of gray in between and unfortunately for athletes, whenever they are busted for "PEDs" which is an even broader categorization, they get lumped into the Canseco's and Alzato's.

[Superman]

Yes. Baseball is in a quagmire of its own doing. They ignored the issue forever and then when they were finally faced with it, Congress is involved and its players are no longer hall worthy. It is real shame as I grew up in the 80's so all my memories of baseball are this stigmatized era.

 

How do you feel about the hall of fame? Should these players be kept out forever? Have their own special place in the hall where it is noted they used steroids?

 

There are players in the HOF who used amphetamines, for sure. Most likely, there are PED guys who were never caught or accused in the HOF already. I think the purists need to stop pretending that they know who did and did not use, and recognize that the Steroid Era is a part of baseball history, and just vote based on baseball accomplishments. That includes Pete Rose, by the way. 

 

History will always remember McGwire and Bonds and Sosa as being the face of the Steroid Era, but they will also remember that those guys saved baseball. We'll always remember that Pete Rose gambled and lied, but we'll also remember that he has more hits than anyone else in the history of the game. To me, trying to keep those guys out of the HOF is like trying to rewrite history. 

[amfootball]

There are players in the HOF who used amphetamines, for sure. Most likely, there are PED guys who were never caught or accused in the HOF already. I think the purists need to stop pretending that they know who did and did not use, and recognize that the Steroid Era is a part of baseball history, and just vote based on baseball accomplishments. That includes Pete Rose, by the way. 

 

History will always remember McGwire and Bonds and Sosa as being the face of the Steroid Era, but they will also remember that those guys saved baseball. We'll always remember that Pete Rose gambled and lied, but we'll also remember that he has more hits than anyone else in the history of the game. To me, trying to keep those guys out of the HOF is like trying to rewrite history. 

I agree completely. One of our sports guys had a great suggestion. He said to make the hall more like a museum as opposed to this place where they pretend everyone in it is completely pure or clean. Have plaques that talk about their baseball careers AND lives. This way you can note the steroid people but also give them credit for their accomplishments. Same with Rose.

 

At some point they have to ask how far they will go with this purist philosophy as to keep a generation out forever is a travesty.

[amfootball]

Strong comments from Shannon Sharpe on Gates "cheating the game" and his PED violation potentially hurting his status for the HoF, http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/07/07/shannon-sharpe-antonio-gates-cheated-the-game/

[Girlzarefanstoo]

When someone breaks the rules, knowingly or unknowingly doesn't really matter.  He did.  He'll pay the penalty.  The team will pay a greater penalty.  His reputation will be impacted with some people and not with others.  If he "accidentally" did it again, a huge stain on his career.

 

AMFootball, this is how a fan reacts that maintains their values with consistency no matter who the infraction involves.  

 

P.S. When Mathis had his issue last year, as a fan of another team it didn't impact my opinion of him - if he did it again, it would.  I personally think being able to conceive a child has a greater life importance than playing football.  He should have known and followed up for himself, that's the responsibility of the pro.  Same with Gates if he's telling the truth.  He should have researched and cleared it.  

[southwest1]

The intent is muscle recovery, often to aid recovery after injury or surgery. There's really nothing nefarious about that.

 

Steroids are only considered bad for athletes. That makes very little sense.

Nefarious is a cool word that never gets used enough. It just conjures up a dark sinister image just by saying the word outloud. I agree with you Superman I have no problem with PEDS as strictly a rehab recovery measure from serious injury. The trick is to avoid addition & dependency on them or to use PEDs as an ATM contract cash machine to print money endlessly. 

 

When someone breaks the rules, knowingly or unknowingly doesn't really matter.  He did.  He'll pay the penalty.  The team will pay a greater penalty.  His reputation will be impacted with some people and not with others.  If he "accidentally" did it again, a huge stain on his career.

 

AMFootball, this is how a fan reacts that maintains their values with consistency no matter who the infraction involves.  

 

P.S. When Mathis had his issue last year, as a fan of another team it didn't impact my opinion of him - if he did it again, it would.  I personally think being able to conceive a child has a greater life importance than playing football.  He should have known and followed up for himself, that's the responsibility of the pro.  Same with Gates if he's telling the truth.  He should have researched and cleared it.  

Nice reply GAFT. Gates to me is a man of high integrity like Manning or Brees. Maybe Antonio should have cleared what he was about to take with a trainer, but at the end of the day, Gates is a good man who will still get a yellow HOF jacket someday. 

[southwest1]

Strong comments from Shannon Sharpe on Gates "cheating the game" and his PED violation potentially hurting his status for the HoF, http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/07/07/shannon-sharpe-antonio-gates-cheated-the-game/

I like Shannon Sharpe, but I thought he was way off base here. Gates is no cheater to me. Just a dude who forgot to get clearance before he swallowed something. 

 

“It calls into question everything that he’s ever accomplished." Bull crap Sharpe. Get off your high horse man. So people aren't allowed any mistakes now? Just because HOF is attached to your name now doesn't mean you're God now Shannon relax. Don't tarnish a man's achievements over a blip on the NFL radar screen. Gates will never get called out for illegal PED use again. Book it. 

[southwest1]

I agree completely. One of our sports guys had a great suggestion. He said to make the hall more like a museum as opposed to this place where they pretend everyone in it is completely pure or clean. Have plaques that talk about their baseball careers AND lives. This way you can note the steroid people but also give them credit for their accomplishments. Same with Rose.

 

At some point they have to ask how far they will go with this purist philosophy as to keep a generation out forever is a travesty.

I tend to subscribe to the same idea. I'm not saying that foul play, wrongdoing, or PED use can be completely erased or forgotten. It can't. But, there is something to be said for recognizing that the HOF is about athletic milestones as opposed to demanding absolute sainthood in our idols. This is why I talk & write about the Rock-N-Roll HOF every year because it's all about how gifted musicians wrestle with their inner demons like booze, drugs, women, reckless spending, loss of cherished friends & loved ones while somehow managing to land on their feet with their livers intact decades later. 

 

I like writing about flaws & how people survive & overcome them because that's what makes us human: Pain & how we learn how to reconcile it thru sports, music, or some other outlet or release mechanism. Put Pete Rose in already. It's getting ridiculous. MLB, NFL, NHL, & the NBA all frown on gambling but stats cater to gambling & fantasy league mania. It's such a racket to me the hypocrisy of it all. 

[southwest1]

There are players in the HOF who used amphetamines, for sure. Most likely, there are PED guys who were never caught or accused in the HOF already. I think the purists need to stop pretending that they know who did and did not use, and recognize that the Steroid Era is a part of baseball history, and just vote based on baseball accomplishments. That includes Pete Rose, by the way. 

 

History will always remember McGwire and Bonds and Sosa as being the face of the Steroid Era, but they will also remember that those guys saved baseball. We'll always remember that Pete Rose gambled and lied, but we'll also remember that he has more hits than anyone else in the history of the game. To me, trying to keep those guys out of the HOF is like trying to rewrite history. 

I'll be the first to admit that I am no wizard when it comes to baseball, but I really concur & respect your entry here Superman. If you go back far enough, I'm sure that Babe Ruth engaged in some techniques to gain a tilt the scales in his favor too. Like you say, there's no way the selection committee in any HOF can guarantee that they know who's completely above board & who isn't. 

 

I also know even as a historian that myths or people we tend to revere as a nation are seldom as clean & pure as we are often led to believe initially. The same is true for athletes. Yes, there are honorable ones of course, but the ideal of perfection is a dangerous precedent to hold everyone one else to. Codes of conduct are necessary naturally & admirable to strive for of course, but as you so eloquently inferred/stated don't romanticize a past that never existed to begin with. Remember things how they actually were not how you might wish they had unfolded in your mind instead.