Jump to content
Scott Pennock

Antonio Garcia - Failed PED

Recommended Posts

I do wonder if he can challenge this as part of his rehab from losing 70+ lbs could have been a legal prescription of some type of roids?

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Scott Pennock said:

I do wonder if he can challenge this as part of his rehab from losing 70+ lbs could have been a legal prescription of some type of roids?

 

When they're in the NFL, they know what's legal.  But when they're on their own (not on a roster) and rehabbing they're probably not in the loop.

 

I had high hopes for him. and I hope you're right but I doubt it.  Either way, I think this means he doesn't count against the initial 53, right? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Scott Pennock said:

I do wonder if he can challenge this as part of his rehab from losing 70+ lbs could have been a legal prescription of some type of roids?


That was one of my first thoughts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Scott Pennock said:

I do wonder if he can challenge this as part of his rehab from losing 70+ lbs could have been a legal prescription of some type of roids?

 

I think the success rate for challenges to PED related suspensions is not too high.  If there is a challenge, I would suspect it go nowhere fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Usually by the time it's reported, the appeals have run their course.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Superman said:

Usually by the time it's reported, the appeals have run their course.

I was thinking that as I pressed submit....lol

18 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

When they're in the NFL, they know what's legal.  But when they're on their own (not on a roster) and rehabbing they're probably not in the loop.

 

I had high hopes for him. and I hope you're right but I doubt it.  Either way, I think this means he doesn't count against the initial 53, right? 

No, he won't count against the initial 53.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Scott Pennock said:

I do wonder if he can challenge this as part of his rehab from losing 70+ lbs could have been a legal prescription of some type of roids?

Doubtful. After Ben Watson briefly retired he underwent testosterone replacement therapy but when he decided to make a comeback he was suspended because of it. So as far as I know, no kind of medical prescription loophole exists.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ehh.. like I said a while back in a Garcia thread . He's a longshot. Been released by I think 3 teams ? Just as easy for another team to sign him to their practice squad. But who knows ?  That said , I for one will not even dream that he's "our LT of the future."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Rackeen305 said:

He should've known better. Its illegal and its the LAW! No way around it bud!

Where is it against the law to take things sold at GNC

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Where is it against the law to take things sold at GNC

When its breaking the NFL rules, guidelines...YES!

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jvan1973 said:

Where is it against the law to take things sold at GNC

This is an excellent point!  I am not condoning any illegal use of PED's mind you, just kind of trying to figure out how legal supplements factor in?  What is next caffeine?  Again, not condoning illegal use, but there seems to be a very grey area?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rackeen305 said:

When its breaking the NFL rules, guidelines...YES!

 

There’s a BIG difference between a substance being illegal and one being banned by the NFL.

 

Many legal supplements are banned by the league.  

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's something his doctor recommended for his long term health, then a football leagues rules become an inferior consideration.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rackeen305 said:

When its breaking the NFL rules, guidelines...YES!

There is a big difference between NFL Regulation and Federal/State Law

Just now, Douzer said:

If it's something his doctor recommended for his long term health, then a football leagues rules become an inferior consideration.

So true

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Coltsfan66 said:

This is an excellent point!  I am not condoning any illegal use of PED's mind you, just kind of trying to figure out how legal supplements factor in?  What is next caffeine?  Again, not condoning illegal use, but there seems to be a very grey area?

The Major Sport Federations across the country and world promote athletic equality and this often limits an athletes life. Some like this others don’t     

     Example: 

        The IAAF(Track and Field) are forcing certain athletes to take estrogen to compete in the future and there is one that has taken them to court to get an injunction 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PrincetonTiger said:

The Major Sport Federations across the country and world promote athletic equality and this often limits an athletes life. Some like this others don’t     

     Example: 

        The IAAF(Track and Field) are forcing certain athletes to take estrogen to compete in the future and there is one that has taken them to court to get an injunction 

Wait until the next olympics when "Confused" men win all the gold medals in womens sports......

 

Wonder how far they'll go left on that topic.....

  • Like 4
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Scott Pennock said:

Wait until the next olympics when "Confused" men win all the gold medals in womens sports......

 

Wonder how far they'll go left on that topic.....

They are stopping it except the one athlete and only for her until June 30th

 

   The IOC and the respective governing bodies already handled this during the heyday of the Warsaw Pact Countries 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

They are stopping it except the one athlete and only for her until June 30th

 

   The IOC and the respective governing bodies already handled this during the heyday of the Warsaw Pact Countries 

Duh..... I do remember that. Thanks for the reminder!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Scott Pennock said:

Duh..... I do remember that. Thanks for the reminder!

2019 is also the year for World Championship in most sports

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

I do wonder if he can challenge this as part of his rehab from losing 70+ lbs could have been a legal prescription of some type of roids?

I'm not sure why he would need steroids after losing weight, but regardless of what he did, he obviously did not check in with the league for permission or guidance.  In my book, that is a 100% cheater.  If people have medical issues, the very first call is to the league office to discuss the issue with NFL Doctors and personnel who handle these issues.  Same as Mathis.  If he legitimately needed to take that masking agent he should have gone to the league for permission or acceptable options for his unique circumstances.  I do not accept any of these "I thought it would be okay" arguments.  Players are informed of the rules.  It is solely their responsible to control what goes into or onto their bodies.  No excuses.  

 

In my view, they should let these guys do whatever legal drugs they want/need to get healthy, but that is not the NFL's view.  So I am just tired of all the excuse making for these guys.  (Not you individually Scott).  Mathis was my favorite player.  Sadly, he cheated and I bet it keeps him out of any chance at the HOF.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s very possible the colts knew the suspension was coming. This sounds similar to the Watson case. Where he never thought he was going to come back and play and was just following orders. This guy had a blood clot condition and for whatever reason this might of been part of his treatment.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JPFolks said:

I'm not sure why he would need steroids after losing weight  

 

To regain all of his lost muscle mass in a fraction of the time it would normally take.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Boiler_Colt said:

 

To regain all of his lost muscle mass in a fraction of the time it would normally take.

 

I don't think the article specifically said he was using steroids.  There are plenty of other banned substances (like what Mathis was using).  In this case, it probably was but we shouldn't jump to conclusions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, JPFolks said:

I'm not sure why he would need steroids after losing weight, but regardless of what he did, he obviously did not check in with the league for permission or guidance.  In my book, that is a 100% cheater.  If people have medical issues, the very first call is to the league office to discuss the issue with NFL Doctors and personnel who handle these issues.  Same as Mathis.  If he legitimately needed to take that masking agent he should have gone to the league for permission or acceptable options for his unique circumstances.  I do not accept any of these "I thought it would be okay" arguments.  Players are informed of the rules.  It is solely their responsible to control what goes into or onto their bodies.  No excuses.  

 

In my view, they should let these guys do whatever legal drugs they want/need to get healthy, but that is not the NFL's view.  So I am just tired of all the excuse making for these guys.  (Not you individually Scott).  Mathis was my favorite player.  Sadly, he cheated and I bet it keeps him out of any chance at the HOF.  

It didn't seem to hurt Bruce Smith getting into the hall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

I do wonder if he can challenge this as part of his rehab from losing 70+ lbs could have been a legal prescription of some type of roids?

 

 Gee, the reports i read had him losing 40lbs and he had that back on when the Colts signed him last season.
 Laughable that a NFL player takes ANYTHING banned unknowingly.
They have access to a system to inform them. Period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

It didn't seem to hurt Bruce Smith getting into the hall

 

 chuckle
Bruce who?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Boiler_Colt said:

 

To regain all of his lost muscle mass in a fraction of the time it would normally take.

Did he have cancer or something similar? (Not sure as the underlying condition was not discussed in Scott's post).  Even in the worst scenarios players still understand the rules.  If you want to be in the league, you should directly let the NFL know what you are doing so there's never a surprise discovery during drug testing.  I've heard (not here on this post) endless extreme scenarios to explain bad drug test results.  (Like Mathis's story for example).  People still know what they are doing. 

 

There's big business in cheating.  If regular people could make millions of dollars by cheating at their job I am guessing it would be far more rampant than it appears in the NFL.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

It didn't seem to hurt Bruce Smith getting into the hall

That's because he wasn't on the fringe of the HOF in the first place.  Mathis is not a first ballot HOF.  His strip sacks are his only justification to get in that sets him well apart.  Everything about Smith's career set him apart. 

 

Nice try though. If Brady was a fringe HOF QB talent with say, one Super Bowl win, I doubt he'd get in either.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think the NFL has in place a system for any steroids being used for medical purposes. And if you're on any steroids, then I'm sure you notify the NFL what is going on. This is something a responsible adult does. They inform their employer that they're taking meds, not just show up to work stoned and then when asked questions say you're on medication. Poor communication if you decide to wait until when asked. And if that's the case I dont want you on my team or as an employee of my business. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JPFolks said:

Did he have cancer or something similar? (Not sure as the underlying condition was not discussed in Scott's post).  Even in the worst scenarios players still understand the rules.  If you want to be in the league, you should directly let the NFL know what you are doing so there's never a surprise discovery during drug testing.  I've heard (not here on this post) endless extreme scenarios to explain bad drug test results.  (Like Mathis's story for example).  People still know what they are doing. 

 

There's big business in cheating.  If regular people could make millions of dollars by cheating at their job I am guessing it would be far more rampant than it appears in the NFL.  

Not sure, but I'm not condoning it's use and not even suggesting he needed them medically. I was just responding to you as to why he would take them to gain weight. No doctor is going to prescribe testosterone (steroids) unless his natural levels were at a dangerously low amount. So more than likely he just wanted to take a shortcut to getting his strength and mass back and got popped for it.

 

Steroids and PED use are extremely prevalent nowadays. They're kind of the epidemic that no one talks about with athletes, hollywood actors and even just people at your local gyms. Today's generation wants instant results with less work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Boiler_Colt said:

Not sure, but I'm not condoning it's use and not even suggesting he needed them medically. I was just responding to you as to why he would take them to gain weight. No doctor is going to prescribe testosterone (steroids) unless his natural levels were at a dangerously low amount. So more than likely he just wanted to take a shortcut to getting his strength and mass back and got popped for it.

 

Steroids and PED use are extremely prevalent nowadays. They're kind of the epidemic that no one talks about with athletes, hollywood actors and even just people at your local gyms. Today's generation wants instant results with less work.

 

 I took a minute to google him. The Pats released him in Sept. 2017 with blood clots in his lungs. He lost a lot of weight with a quick recovery unlikely.
 He was 300lb plus when we signed him last off season. 
  Sounds like his masking agent failed him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Boiler_Colt said:

Not sure, but I'm not condoning it's use and not even suggesting he needed them medically. I was just responding to you as to why he would take them to gain weight. No doctor is going to prescribe testosterone (steroids) unless his natural levels were at a dangerously low amount. So more than likely he just wanted to take a shortcut to getting his strength and mass back and got popped for it.

 

Steroids and PED use are extremely prevalent nowadays. They're kind of the epidemic that no one talks about with athletes, hollywood actors and even just people at your local gyms. Today's generation wants instant results with less work.

Sorry if my question wasn't clear.  I was saying that just because he had lost weight, that shouldn't cause him to lose muscle tone etc. if he is still working out.  Usually when I go up and down in weight, I am gaining muscle tone, switch out fat for muscle.  Certainly not as drastic as the range of weight discussed here.  You were talking about the difficulty of GAINING weight and I was thinking lose of muscle while LOSING weight.  Sorry for any confusion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JPFolks said:

Sorry if my question wasn't clear.  I was saying that just because he had lost weight, that shouldn't cause him to lose muscle tone etc. if he is still working out.  Usually when I go up and down in weight, I am gaining muscle tone, switch out fat for muscle.  Certainly not as drastic as the range of weight discussed here.  You were talking about the difficulty of GAINING weight and I was thinking lose of muscle while LOSING weight.  Sorry for any confusion. 

No worries. Yeah i don't think he lost all that weight intentionally, I think it was probably a lot of atrophy because of his condition. But I don't really know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is the blood clot issue cleared up?  

 

If so it sound like someone with a decent ceiling (being a former 3rd rounder) but just hasn't been able to get on the field.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, JPFolks said:

Sorry if my question wasn't clear.  I was saying that just because he had lost weight, that shouldn't cause him to lose muscle tone etc. if he is still working out.  Usually when I go up and down in weight, I am gaining muscle tone, switch out fat for muscle.  Certainly not as drastic as the range of weight discussed here.  You were talking about the difficulty of GAINING weight and I was thinking lose of muscle while LOSING weight.  Sorry for any confusion. 

 

 No doubt a good hard workout to keep up his muscle tone would have been fine while taking blood thinners to treat his blood clots in his lungs.  lmao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Valpo2004 said:

So is the blood clot issue cleared up?  

 

If so it sound like someone with a decent ceiling (being a former 3rd rounder) but just hasn't been able to get on the field.  

 

 Hmmm! We signed him a YEAR after the problem arose and he was back over 300lbs. Good question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Boiler_Colt said:

Today's generation wants instant results with less work.

 

"Today's generation..." when steroids have been in rampant use since the '50s. Baseball players were using amphetamines as a performance enhancer -- "greenies" -- after the war.  Let's stop blaming everything on "today's generation."

 

It's true that a lot of this steroid/PED stuff is a symptom of people wanting to take shortcuts, and/or get better and more results than they could naturally achieve. But it's also true that PEDs have been overly stigmatized in the last 30 years. People do a lot of different things to enhance their personal performance, inside sports and separate from sports. But only in sports is it considered "cheating." 

 

I'm not saying it should be okay to take steroids or other banned PEDs; if you play in a pro sports league, you have to follow the rules, bottom line. But I do think the conversation about PEDs needs to evolve beyond 'that guy took steroids, he's a cheater.' 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

"Today's generation..." when steroids have been in rampant use since the '50s. Baseball players were using amphetamines as a performance enhancer -- "greenies" -- after the war.  Let's stop blaming everything on "today's generation."

 

It's true that a lot of this steroid/PED stuff is a symptom of people wanting to take shortcuts, and/or get better and more results than they could naturally achieve. But it's also true that PEDs have been overly stigmatized in the last 30 years. People do a lot of different things to enhance their personal performance, inside sports and separate from sports. But only in sports is it considered "cheating." 

 

I'm not saying it should be okay to take steroids or other banned PEDs; if you play in a pro sports league, you have to follow the rules, bottom line. But I do think the conversation about PEDs needs to evolve beyond 'that guy took steroids, he's a cheater.' 

I wasn't just referring to steroids. Everything is instant today. Streaming, one day shipping, smart phones etc. People don't wait for anything anymore. Technically in my early 30's I still consider myself part of "today's generation". I will say though having been around gyms and sports organizations for most of my life I am noticing more steroid use in younger kids than ever before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Boiler_Colt said:

I wasn't just referring to steroids. Everything is instant today. Streaming, one day shipping, smart phones etc. People don't wait for anything anymore. Technically in my early 30's I still consider myself part of "today's generation". I will say though having been around gyms and sports organizations for most of my life I am noticing more steroid use in younger kids than ever before.

You missed the 80s and guys like Ben Johnson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sigh...........   This is beyond really frustrating.    You're accusing me of things I literally haven't done.     That's very Irish of you.    Really annoying.      You ask for benefit of the doubt while never giving it out yourself.   I've put certain things into bold.   I'll try taking them one at a time.   Your first bold...   that this is not me saying that teams that aren't doing this are stupid.    I'm sorry, but when you declare that you've come up that you think is clearly and obvously better,  that you think you've re-invented the wheel and sliced bread,  it certainly feels like you're casting a disapporving eye toward any team that's not doing things your preferred way as a matter of course.   Then you claim,  that I want Ballard in the building ASAP,  but not before January.    Let me see if you understand this word.....   NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!   Was that clear enough for you?       If Irsay had decided in the spring of 16 to fire Grigson and hire Ballard in the spring, I would've been ok with it.   It's not desirable,  but if Irsay made that call THEN,  I'd be ok with it.     Where YOU mis-read me,  is that roughly 95 of owners make this decision during the season.    They see things they don't like and they decide during the season to make a change -- typically when the season ends.    Sometimes, an exec will be fired during the season and someone like Dorsey comes in during the season to oversee things and learn about the organization.    I'm fine with that.  There's no record of me opposing that.   I start with January,  because that's when the business season starts for front office and coaches.   Period.   The NFL views it as preferrable.    But making the switch in the spring is doable, as I've said in every post, and which you have ignored or confused badly.    But if Ballard had been hired in the spring of 16,  I'd have been fine with it.   This isn't the first time I've said some version of this.    This is not some ah-ha moment.   As to the bold declaring that there are tons of qualified guys and that CHOOSING the best guy is another story.   Here's my reponse to that.   No.   nonsense.     They are the same story.    They are connected.    Because you play down the fact that most GM's and most HC's fail.   They get fired before their 4 or 5 year contracts expire.   The owner has seen enough and makes a change.   Saying there are always qualified guys is meaningless.    Because FINDING the best guy who will succeed, isn't just important,  it's EVERYTHING.   All 32 teams can announce they hired a qualified guy.    That isn't hard.    But the vast majority of teams are introducing his successor in a few years.    That's why a franchise like Pittsburgh has very little turnover either in HC or the front office.   While franchises like the Jets or Buffalo or Miami are introducing someone new so often, you can practically set your watch to it.     Generally speaking,  the new GM has a long history of scouting and evaluating talent.   The new HC has a history of success, both as a position coach and a coordinator.   They can easily be called qualified,  (though new guys like Kliff Kingsbury and Zack Taylor do NOT have a long track record of success)  But the vast majority of hires...   are soon enough fired.   That doesn't speak well to their qualifications.      As to you meaning what you're saying...   Of course you mean what you say and I stated that clearly.  I don't know why this should rub you the wrong way.  I literally wrote that I know you mean what you say.    I said what I said as a rhetorical point,  not an attacking point.    My ultimate point was made at the end of my first post to you.   You typically write persuasive arguments.    You're able to frequently made me see your viewpoint.    But not here.    You accuse me of not considering your argument.    I'm sorry,  I am considering what you write.   But I don't see the typical high quality Superman argument.   I don't see points that connect.    Your argument feels like the one you'd make for doable.   It doesn't convince me at all that it's preferable.  
    • Yeah, Ballard said he's a patient guy, and he doesn't mind waiting to pick. We almost traded back from 34 as well if Rock wasn't there. I personally love the "trade back" strategy at the end of round 1, and wouldn't mind doing it in most every draft. A late 1st for a mid-second and early/mid second (from the Redskins) over two drafts is fine with me!
    • Haven't done research on the 2020 draft yet, but if it ends up having an elite WR or OT, I wouldn't mind trading up this year. We'll have to see where we finish (hopefully 32 ), and make a decision from there. Ballard landing the Redskins 2nd rounder may be a brilliant move.
    • I had us 9-7 just based on guessing/hoping/predicting Luck would be healthy and play great. I was right but a lucky guess, I guess  . I thought that would get us a 6th seed. We won 10 games which got us in.
    • For the first time in a while, I am impressed with the Colts development of players. If this current trend continues, a lot of opinions will change. 
  • Members

    • IndyEric07

      IndyEric07 8

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Nate!

      Nate! 44

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • coltsfanej

      coltsfanej 159

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Kirie89

      Kirie89 22

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • coltsfeva

      coltsfeva 1,110

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • CoachLite

      CoachLite 369

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Cynjin

      Cynjin 2,822

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • MakeitWayne87

      MakeitWayne87 0

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...