March 19, 2007

I really, really liked this article, and pretty much agree with most of it. I've long railed that the stain of "performance enhancing drugs" is silly in a culture where, as he noted, people drink Starbucks before going to work, or have a few drinks before hitting on that cute waitress, or obviously things like the stockbroker on cocaine.

Klosterman rightly notes that outside of being a 10-year-old- a standard we'd hold basically no other profession to- we expect that people use drugs of all kinds routinely, and that this is no big deal. So why do we care for sports?

There comes a point in every normal person's life when they stop looking at athletes as models for living. Any thinking adult who follows pro sports understands that some people are corrupt and the games are just games and money drives everything. It would be strange if they did not realize these things. But what's equally strange is the way so many fans (and sportswriters, myself included) revert back to their 10-year-old selves whenever an issue like steroids shatters the surface.

Most of the time, we don't care what football players do when they're not playing football. On any given Wednesday, we have only a passing interest in who they are as people or how they choose to live. But Sunday is different. On Sunday, we have wanted them to be superfast, superstrong, superentertaining and, weirdly, superethical.

Exactly. These athletes are our entertaining gladiators, and we couldn't give a crap about them when the game's not being played. So why this expectation that the same person we holler "You fucking bum!" at when they strike out or throw an interception should not only be better at the game, but purer than an altarboy to boot- purer than we are ourselves, as anyone who's had that afternoon coffee run could claim to be. Imagine if our bosses told us at work to be more productive, shouted obscenities at us in the hallway when our work wasn't quite perfect, yet forbade us from having a morning latte or having a drink on Friday night to blow off some steam.

And this, for example, is why I just don't get the Bonds hate. He's just doing what we all want, which is pushing himself to be the best, to thrill us with towering moonshots and gawdy numbers. And if you think all his accomplishments are just from some pill- or that Barry's the only one doing it and has an unfair advantage- then you're free to go get those same pills yourself and become the best hitter that ever walked the earth.

posted by Hal Incandenza at 6:45 PM CDT on March 19

Caffeine to steroids? Really?

posted by SummersEve at 5:06 AM CDT on March 20

Good read. I have to agree with this article as well. Chuck Klosterman made some interesting points. We, as fans need to get over our 'pure sport' theory and understand that the only time a sport is 'pure' nowadays is when a kid is out there playing it. I don't want to say that ALL professional athletes are on something but the bottom line is, most athletes are. The regular wear and tear of a grueling schedule can make any person take something in order to go out and perform at a high level day in and day out, so what makes anyone think that athletes don't? After a long week of work, people like to go out and blow some steam. It may be going out to a club/bar and having a few drinks or for the most extreme, going out and getting shit faced while driving a Porshe with a syringe full of steriods sticking out of their groin area, next to their Glock and a waterbong on their passenger seat engrossed with what makes Rickey Williams live on a yoga farm. I'm not suggesting that athletes that are taking performance-enhancing drugs are in the wrong, I'm just saying I'm not surprised if they are.

posted by BornIcon at 7:40 AM CDT on March 20

Caffeine to steroids? Really?

If you're comparing attending a meeting and writing a report to running full speed into a 400lb man. Then, yes. Really.

The point was "performance enhancing" happens all over, and that argument is a bit of a strawman.

Great article. I fail to see why one wouldn't find something that rings true there.

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 8:53 AM CDT on March 20

I've always been confused about the real concern steroids present. The "role model" crap always comes up, and with it the concern with youngsters and how they perceive the use of such drugs. But the bigger concern seems to be from the on-field standpoint as it relates to competition and the record books. So which is it? Are we more worried because of the possibilty more people will be taking, and altering their lives by injecting drugs? Or, could we really care less what athletes do to their bodies, but we're pissed because it negatively impacts fair competition? In baseball, I feel there's no doubt the average fan could care less if a athlete risks their health in any way; just don't threaten any records we hold near and dear. I'm sure many will say it's a combination of the two, but I will honestly believe it's a game issue more than a health/wellness/legal issue.

posted by dyams at 10:16 AM CDT on March 20

The only possible weakness i see (at this point) in the article's argument is that at some point we all grow out of idolizing professional athletes.

While this is true for most of us, i sincerely wonder if the 17-19 year old, who is getting ready to enter into collegiate athletics, has "grown up" yet.

The players aren't just influencing 10 year olds, but also 17-19 year old Division 1 athletes will will be juicing because the idolize the persona and athleticism of the people in what the teenager hopes is his future place of employment.

The 18 year old college football freshamn may realize that he needs "an edge" to be like Merriman, so he makes a choice b/c he still does idolize him. The ensuing road he chooses is a poor one for him.

I think that the role model argument is dismissed so easily today b/c we view it as applying to 6 year olds. However, i think that athletes are heroes to highschool and college players as well, and these people will have the knowledge, understanding, and (if their coach is shady) the means to get PEDs.

I think that we need to view the PED controversy from a preventative standpoint instead of just getting rid of them in pro sports. Professional athletes doing steriods make it almost necessary for most college athletes to also do so in order to get to where they want to go. It's a trickle down effect.

I don't know what the answer is, but i think we need to reframe our understanding of who exactly these athletes are idolizing and influencing, b/c it is more than just 6 year-olds. I think that is a caricature of reality to justify our need to be "entertained" to claim that only toddlers try to model their life after pro athletes.

posted by brainofdtrain at 12:03 PM CDT on March 20

There are numerous weaknesses in this article, the most glaring is the heavy-handed assumption that every talented athlete is juiced.

I think this is buttressed somewhat by two things:

The tendency for most (especially those in the League offices... Of every sport) to suggest that only a small percentage of pro athletes are juiced.

The glaring oversimplification that Klosterman said this. He said the punter was juiced. Feel free to draw your own conclusions.

Remember that the only athletes that have come clean about their own steriod use - Alzaedo, Caminetti, Canseco have all suggested that the number of athletes on steriods is much, much higher than one would think. These days, I'm not so keen to think that they were just saying that to be controversial (or deflecting the blame).

Also - I don't know what the answer is, but i think we need to reframe our understanding of who exactly these athletes are idolizing and influencing, b/c it is more than just 6 year-olds. I think that is a caricature of reality to justify our need to be "entertained" to claim that only toddlers try to model their life after pro athletes.

Couldn't agree more. There is more than just some high-falutin' moral issue about records here. There is a dangerous ethical standard that were chosing to either enforce or ignore. It permeates athletics and goes far beyond it.

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 12:58 PM CDT on March 20

It has everything to do with imparting meaning in drab and dull everyday lives. If the Red Sox can win the World Series, well maybe you and I do amount to a hill of beans and maybe we'll make it out of this dead-end town and get somewhere where people will recognize our value. If the Red Sox won the World Series because they were full of HGH, then cheaters do prosper and everything does suck and give me a skinful of heroin and whatever is on the top of the pop charts.

Hmmm. Your ideas intrigue me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 1:36 PM CDT on March 20

I'm not a fan of the "what about the children" crap... Except in this case.

These guys don't just fall off the athlete tree. They come from high schools and colleges. So are we just supposed to let them dope when they get to the pro's? College? Or do we stat shooting them up in high school? The National High School Doping Program. No Child Left Behind.

Point is, if doping's suddenly legal, well, you can't become a doped pro without being a doped amateur. Bad things happen when high school or middle school kids dope. So, yeah, in this case, it is for the kids.

Also, what yerfatma said.

posted by SummersEve at 2:36 PM CDT on March 20

But yerfatma, is it cheating if most people are doing it? I mean, if Barry Bonds were taking steroids, but so were most of the pitchers, and other hitters... then is it cheating to take them as well? Or are you just keeping up with the Joneses?

That is the only even moderately compelling argument against steroid use I've ever heard: that if some take it, all will feel pressure to take it, so they can keep their jobs. But being a professional athlete is not a Constitutional right: if they don't want to do what it takes to be at the highest levels- whether that's simply working out religiously during the off-season, or doing whatever you can to make your body as strong as it can be- then too bad. I think you can be, at least outside the NFL, just as good without steroids as with them (or rather, you can be an everyday major leaguer and all-star without juicing up, as all juicing will do is help you recover faster and to build muscle quicker).

As for highschool/college athletes: well, if they're adults, again, it's their bodies. If you're a top-ranked athlete in a division 1 school, you should know it, and know you have a very good chance of making the pros in your sport. At that point, if you choose to use performance-enhancing drugs, you do so at your possible risk, but with likely rewards (since you're enhancing your chances at winning the pro sports lottery and becoming a millionaire by 25). I don't think the Div-III field hockey players will be juicing up any more than they did already, since they're not pursuing megabucks signing bonuses and first-round draft picks.

I still say that if you asked Joe Schmoe on the street "Hey, would you take modern performance enhancing drugs under a doctor's supervision for 6 months, if we then paid you $20 million?" What's the over/under on the % that say yes- 90? 95? 99? These aren't your 1970's horse-hormone steroids, these are modern, and likely safer, steroids. How safe we won't know until

posted by Hal Incandenza at 2:50 PM CDT on March 20

These guys don't just fall off the athlete tree.

AWESOME.... i think I finally have a line to shut my Bonds lovin, steroid defending friend up for life.

Mucho Gracias... merci beacoup... kam sa ham nee da.... THANKS.

posted by 2 time mvp of the shittiest team ever at 3:02 PM CDT on March 20

Pete Rose bet on baseball. Baseball players and football players use steroids to enhance their performance. Both are against the rules. Will BB be kept out of Cooperstown or some football player kept out of Akron because they used steroids??? I think not. If the rules on steroids were enforced like the gambling rule all convicted players would be banned for life and not allowed into their respective Halls.
Don't hold your breath............

posted by Ironhead at 5:59 PM CDT on March 20

Christ, SummersEve, you're right! Why, pretty soon overly-ambitious parents will be doping their fetuses in vitro, because if you don't excel in pre-school gym jamboree, you'll never make the pros!

posted by Hal Incandenza at 6:26 PM CDT on March 20

Both are against the rules. Will BB be kept out of Cooperstown or some football player kept out of Akron because they used steroids???

You make the mistake thinking that the rule against betting on baseball and the rule against using performance enhancing drugs are equal.

They aren't.

posted by grum@work at 6:54 PM CDT on March 20

Actually, Hal, I'm way ahead of you. I'm juicing my boys in the sack. That way they'll swim so damn fast the pro's will have to notice.

Super Sperm.

posted by SummersEve at 3:29 AM CDT on March 21

Pete Rose bet on baseball. Baseball players and football players use steroids to enhance their performance. Both are against the rules.

True, they may be both against the rules but what Pete Rose did was something that is the #1 rule that you do not break. Many athletes have used something to get thru the day as far as drugs/prescribed medication goes (aches & pains, deep bruises, lacerations and/or headaches, ect...) but the rules for PED and betting on baseball are two very different things and shouldn't even be tried to be compared. Most athletes know that if they use a PED and get caught, they'll more than likely be fined or suspended, or maybe both, but for someone to bet on baseball while they're involved in the sport in some capacity, that's just something you know you just don't do and if caught, you will be banned for life. I would never say that an athlete using some sort of PED is the best 'role model' or even the best all-around player but if the league that they play under has no problem letting them continue playing their respective sport if they're not found guilty of any wrong doing, then why should I have a problem with it?

posted by BornIcon at 7:14 AM CDT on March 21

"vito90" So glad you know more about Barry Bonds than what you get from sportswriters!As a Giants employee,i'm telling you Barry is a nice man!Also you're wrong about Aaron having the best wrists,that distinction goes to the great Ernie Banks of Cubs fame!!!

posted by squirrelone at 8:10 AM CDT on March 21

Barry is a nice man!

I'm going to use this every time questions of my infidelity, drug use, seal clubbing, and gross misogyny come. "Sure I might have nailed your fugly sister while smoking base and wacking those hideous little critters that make such cute coats, but I am a nice man. A very nice man indeed."

See how that works. Worst. Argument. Evah.

posted by HATER 187 at 10:30 AM CDT on March 21

What's going to happen down the road to all the sports players and evrybody in sports high school college etc..... they are all going to regret doing them one day when they are on their deathbed

posted by luther70 at 1:02 PM CDT on March 21

I follow sport because I want to see meritocracy. I want to see those that work the hardest and those that are simply the best compete.

Same for me...that's why the NBA and MLB has lost much of its luster to me. The NFL is next for me.

I say this: there's more to life than winning. I understand the competitive drive for excellence and, within proper balance, respect it immensely. But, whatever happened to guys like Lou Gehrig showing appreciation for the sport by obeying the rules and being a gentleman?

By the way, my hat's off to Jason Taylor's rebuff of Merriman. Hopefully more guys will follow him and stand up as positive role models. For those on this thread who deny the role model argument, you've obviously never coached little leagues or reached out to teens. And, if you are a little league coach I hope you're not my kid's coach. I wanna guy leading my kid whose got the guts to call a spade "a spade" and steroid users "cheaters." I mean my kid will probably never make it to the Majors (one can wish though!) but he'll still have real life to live. And in the real world there are rules we all have to live by. If we don't, we'll have a price to pay.

posted by ChiefsSuperFan at 1:55 PM CDT on March 21

I think a meritocracy is just like democracy in that it works much better in theory than in reality.

Except a democracy, by its very root word, requires multiple people. I can compete all by myself, regardless of what the Pope thinks or the hair on my hands. I will celebrate those that achieve through hard work and good fortune and quietly ignore those that cheat (as best I can discern them). They're of no interest to me; anyone can do it.

posted by yerfatma at 3:19 PM CDT on March 21

I will celebrate those that achieve through hard work and good fortune and quietly ignore those that cheat (as best I can discern them).

That's the beauty of cheating. People don't get caught all that much. It is impossible to know whose achievements are legitimate and whose aren't. Your absolute favorite athlete could cheat regularly and you wouldn't know. So, all you could be celebrating are the people who are clever enough not to get caught cheating. I know it sounds jaded, but there is no point in thinking that athletes are any different than the people around you, with a great many of them having shifting moralities to suit their ends.

I don't buy that ill-gotten gains thing. It doesn't happen. It is a waste of energy to wait around for it. Life isn't fair and I have yet to see any evidence of some cosmic balance.

posted by bperk at 4:41 PM CDT on March 21

I don't buy that ill-gotten gains thing. It doesn't happen.

Cheaters pay for their deceit. They may not get caught by superiors, but they do get caught by their own conscience. And they pay by having their conscience seared so that it is easier to do again the next time. The end result is loss of character.

Hence, I think there are many Pete Rose's who in the Golden years of their life are untrustworthy and viewed as circus freaks. All of that because early on they exchanged a life of character for ill-gotten gains. What have they given up? What payment have they made? In my mind it is the biggest payment of all--the respect of those they leave behind.

posted by ChiefsSuperFan at 8:18 AM CDT on March 22