Putting This PED Thing To Bed

In 2010, Seahawks had 68 players on their active roster.

Over the course of the 2011, Seahawks invited 36 new players to their roster.

In 2012, it was 19.

In 2013, at the beginning of the season, I believe that number was 16.

Trying to think over the course of the current season, we've seen the Seahawks add:

Kellen Davis
BJ Daniels
Bryan Walters
Caylin Hauptman
Michael Brooks
DeShawn Shead
(And just recently Parrish Cox but I won't count him)

So, it brings 2013's number of new players to 22.

68+36+19+22 = 145 players who've played under Caroll and the Seahawks the last 4 years.

If you do the hard count for PEDs, six players have tested positive.

6/145 = 4.1%

If you're not a JACKASS about it like I've seen from opposing fans, mostly 49er fans. You would understand to learn about those 6 players.

1. Allen Barbe- Suspended with Seahawks for a drug test he failed with the Dolphins, no longer with the team.

2. John Moffitt- Suspended for 4 games, but later reduced to 1 because he forgot to file the special exempt for prescription Adderral. No longer w/ team.

3. Winston Guy- Suspended 4 games as a Rookie in 2012. No longer w/ team.

4. Brandon Browner- Suspended 4 games in 2012.

5. Bruce Irvin- Suspended for 4 games in March of 2013. A player in a drug program has to submit to 20 random drug tests per month. So, since March, Irvin has passed over 160+ drug tests.

6. Richard Sherman- Not suspended 4 games because he won his appeal.

So, if you want to include Richard Sherman... I'm going to logically subtract Barbe and Moffit... as neither player actually "cheated" for the Seahawks.

It leaves the Seahawks with 4 players/ 1 no longer with the team who more or less tested positive for PEDs.

4/145 players = only 2.76% of all players who played for Carroll over the course of 4 years.

Is 2.76% of all players enough to be labeled as cheaters and justify calling Pete the Cheat? I think not and I'm pretty certain Seahawks wouldn't even rank in the top ten % of teams with players suspended for PEDs if you did this the 31 other teams because Seahawks high roster turnover.

Disclaimer: I'm not 100% certain that 145 players is the actually factual number. I'm like 90% certain my research was and is accurate.

Even at 90% with a 10% margin for error still puts the Seahawks at only 3% of players suspended for PEDs out of all players who've played under Carroll.

Come on NFL and haters alike... grab your pitchforks and torches for 3% or lower suspension rate.

And just to close this case... Bruce Irvin is the only player suspended in 2013 for PED s use. This event occured 6 months prior to the actual season and since then he has passed over 8 months of drug tests. Can't really call that performance enhancing for the season can you... also consider the Seahawks were 4-0 without him.

This information is yours and use it however you like 12s. Just know my intended audience was for the haters of opposing fan bases.

One thing that is certain this team is 97% cheat-free in the last 4 years... that is a passing grade in any metric.

And considering this year alone in 2013: that number is like 1 (Bruce Irvin) out of 63 or 1.6%...which makes the team 98.4% clean.

Seahawks and Pete Carroll are NOT cheaters. If we win the Super Bowl... we would have done it fair and square.

Good work on the numbers, PH. Those stats are nice to know.

Opposing fans who would label Pete and the Hawks as cheaters don't care about logic.

With my education being in kinesiology, my occupation being in a related field, and having played juco hoops (and therefore having shared locker/weght rooms with college football players) I feel confident in assuming/stating that the majority of collegiate and pro football players are on PEDs; and that it is naiive to think otherwise.

For the most part the PEDs are able to stay ahead of the testing. PED use in sports doesn't bother me at all, as I look to sports for fun entertainment and not as a beacon of morality. 6'5 240lbs with 4.3 speed doesn't happen organically folks; but it sure is fun to watch.

kobebryant":33iexrwo said:

With my education being in kinesiology, my occupation being in a related field, and having played juco hoops (and therefore having shared locker/weght rooms with college football players) I feel confident in assuming/stating that the majority of collegiate and pro football players are on PEDs; and that it is naiive to think otherwise.

For the most part the PEDs are able to stay ahead of the testing. PED use in sports doesn't bother me at all, as I look to sports for fun entertainment and not as a beacon of morality. 6'5 240lbs with 4.3 speed doesn't happen organically folks; but it sure is fun to watch.

Click to expand...

So, you're saying there isn't a small percentage of the population, edge of the bell curve type people out there whose physical abilities naturally exceed your expectations?

SacHawk2.0":2j5ujq5w said:

Click to expand...

Thats an enigma, big guy with man boobs or big girl that strikes fear in mens hearts.

I'm guessing it's the latter.

SacHawk2.0":2x42ymr9 said:

kobebryant":2x42ymr9 said:

With my education being in kinesiology, my occupation being in a related field, and having played juco hoops (and therefore having shared locker/weght rooms with college football players) I feel confident in assuming/stating that the majority of collegiate and pro football players are on PEDs; and that it is naiive to think otherwise.

For the most part the PEDs are able to stay ahead of the testing. PED use in sports doesn't bother me at all, as I look to sports for fun entertainment and not as a beacon of morality. 6'5 240lbs with 4.3 speed doesn't happen organically folks; but it sure is fun to watch.

Click to expand...

So, you're saying there isn't a small percentage of the population, edge of the bell curve type people out there whose physical abilities naturally exceed your expectations?

Click to expand...

Oh, absolutely there are.

But on the whole, the changes in size - especially in the trenches, cannot be scientifically attributed solely to advancements in the fields of strength and conditioning, nutrition and supplements. That would account for some difference, but not the sea-change that has been seen over the last 40 years or so (my masters thesis touched on this). Further, the relationship between recovery speed and what these men are putting their bodies through is something that blatantly sticks out; but it doesn't bother me, and the NFL shouldn't even care as they know damn well they want their stars on the field ($$).

But like I said, it doesn't bother me at all - as it is purely about the entertainment to me; so I would never "shout it from the mountains" or try to publish an academic article taking shots at these athletes like some "holier than thou" Dbags in the industry do. I never bring it up in conversation unless the topic presents itself either, like here - though I realize I am veering on a hijacking here.

So yes, I do agree with you that absolutely there are true bell curve genetic lottery winners, as well as some scrappy hardworkers - and that is why I try not to bring it up often, and I say "majority" instead of "all" - because it would be unfair to group the clean ones (Wilson, Rodgers ..dudes with superior athletic ability to go along with bigtime intelligence, work ethic and character) in with the masses.

Just curious. Because the best of the best are often found in the NFL.

Freaks.

It's one thing to go from Barry Bonds to Barry Bonds 2.0

It's entirely different to see a guy like ET put on size over the years and change his game to compensate for diminished speed.

Can you post a link showing that Barbre wasn't with the Hawks when he tested positive? I've seen this talking point numerous times, but I don't think it's accurate. I'm pretty sure he did test positive while he was a Seahawk.

kobebryant":3j98e4wt said:

With my education being in kinesiology, my occupation being in a related field, and having played juco hoops (and therefore having shared locker/weght rooms with college football players) I feel confident in assuming/stating that the majority of collegiate and pro football players are on PEDs; and that it is naiive to think otherwise.

For the most part the PEDs are able to stay ahead of the testing. PED use in sports doesn't bother me at all, as I look to sports for fun entertainment and not as a beacon of morality. 6'5 240lbs with 4.3 speed doesn't happen organically folks; but it sure is fun to watch.

Click to expand...

One thing the research doesn't touch on is how hard it is to get caught in the first place. I'm not saying 'Hawks are cheaters. That's not my point. Nor am I saying the Conclusion of the Research wrong. The point I'm trying to make is how relevant is the *research* when some of the assumptions might not be correct. There is a hidden assumption in the research that it's difficult to go undetected if the player is taking PED's. Is that true? Aren't there ways to substitute test samples? Aren't there ways to mask PED's? How competent are the testers? Can they be fooled? Can the Testers be paid or influenced to look the other way? How seriously does the NFL look at violations and do they really put a high priority on it, or are they just doing something to appease Congress, and are not really serious about it? Those are some of the questions that need to be answered if you want to accept the conclusion of the research.

Pandion Haliaetus":enguh1ii said:

In 2010

Click to expand...

Your question is if the Hawks should be thought of as having a problem with cheating by using PEDs, but you're basically just coming up with clauses to decrease the % of Hawks who have been suspended for PEDs.

For it to mean anything at all, you'd have to grant these same clauses to all the other teams, and show that the Hawks % is below average for the league as a whole. If not, introducing clauses to lower the % doesn't tell us anything at all. You're obviously not going to do this for all other teams ( nor should you :lol but I'd suggest:

1) Verify that Barbre wasn't with the Hawks (as Fender questions)

2) Seriously think about if you want to treat reduced suspensions as non-suspensions, as you do here to lower the Hawks rate.

3) Pick three or four other teams to do this for also, and show that using the same % reduction strategies, that these other teams have a higher % of players suspended for PEDs in the same time period you've already defined.

#3 obviously won't be definitive, but it at least would be related to your question about if the Hawks should be treated as having a problem with PEDs or not, whereas what you're currently doing doesn't do anything to answer that question.

Remember how the "old" Raiders are legendary for all kinds of dark deeds?

Listen to John Madden talk about them and he will say that the large majority of those infamous tales were exaggerated or simply not true. Madden also said that such talk was an advantage to the Raiders because they knew they were in the opponent's heads.

I'll just simply say it. Even with the home team winning 9 of the last 10 games, the Seahawks are in the Niner's heads. They are in the Niner's fans head as well.

kobebryant hit it straight out of the park. I would suspect that the vast majority of all high end athletes are taking something and the vast minority are the genetic freak lottery (unless saying that to even be there in the first place you had some genetic fortitude). And even those who hit the genetic lottery maybe taking something. With a window to make money and the pool being so small for these guys (and gals) even if the placebo effect will be helpful whether the drugs really does anything or not. The edge is razor thin for the vast majority of these athletes. Look at how many of them are superstitious about things.

That is why this argument is silly to me. Do I think there are other on the team doing stuff, absolutely. They just have not been caught. This goes for every team out there.

The conversation isn't worth having if the facts aren't going to be used. Niner fans claim that the Hawks are "Cheaters"? Keep them to the facts, make them explain exactly how the "hawks" cheat. What you will find are two players left on the team that had anything to do with PEDs, Irvin and Browner. That's all they got, one of those guys hasn't even played against the Niners since Fall of 2012, he has missed the last 3 games. So, make them explain how Irvin's offseason PED violation makes the team cheaters. Browner and Thurmond getting busted for weed is absolutely NO different than Aldon Smith getting popped for weed. Hmm.. I wonder how many other Niner players have substances in their system but don't get tested. In any case, smoking pot isn't cheating, it is stupid.

2 players, that is all they have. Anything else is just Niner rhetoric. As far as cheating goes, maybe the Hawks should pay players under the table or change the wording on the contracts so that they can keep their guys together. it could be worse, the Hawks could have an ownership group that remains directly connected to a convicted felon. Their hero, the icon, the legend of Niner Lore, Eddie D... However, unlike the Niner fans' elaborate story of cheating by the Seahawks staff and the players, the Niners stuff is fact. If they are so against cheating, why are they Niner fans?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/inside_game/peter_king/news/1999/07/22/insider_king/

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/news/2000/12/01/king_salarycap/

http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/DeBartolo-Guilty-of-Felony-1-million-fine-2-2986872.php

Taking PED's to improve your performance is wrong. It is unacceptable and the tolerance for it should be very low, meaning 2nd offense is a league exit. I wanted to make it clear that I do not support it and I do not want Browner back on this team anyways if he can't put the team first, but no Niner fan has ANY business talking about cheating.

^^^ Gotcha.

So for the Hawks because a player caught taking PEDs last year isn't on the team this year it doesn't count, but for the 9ers Brent Jones not getting a 500K bonus 15 years ago does count.

Who could argue with this logic?

EntiatHawk":2kqu5re7 said:

That is why this argument is silly to me. Do I think there are other on the team doing stuff, absolutely. They just have not been caught. This goes for every team out there.

Click to expand...

Do you have kids? If so, what do you say to them when they get in trouble and they're excuse is that everyone else was doing it?

More excuses and rationalization.

What I don't like about the "seahawks are cheaters" argument is that even if our organization was promoting these activities (highly doubt it), it's not even cheating. Cheating gives you a competitive advantage and last I checked there was nothing advantageous about having a player suspended for 4 or more games. AND, even if the benefits of taking PEDs vs getting suspensions do pay off in the long, then basically that means every other NFL team is doing the same thing.

Popeyejones":1g6r7e4n said:

Pandion Haliaetus":1g6r7e4n said:

In 2010

Click to expand...

Your question is if the Hawks should be thought of as having a problem with cheating by using PEDs, but you're basically just coming up with clauses to decrease the % of Hawks who have been suspended for PEDs.

For it to mean anything at all, you'd have to grant these same clauses to all the other teams, and show that the Hawks % is below average for the league as a whole. If not, introducing clauses to lower the % doesn't tell us anything at all. You're obviously not going to do this for all other teams ( nor should you :lol but I'd suggest:

1) Verify that Barbre wasn't with the Hawks (as Fender questions)

2) Seriously think about if you want to treat reduced suspensions as non-suspensions, as you do here to lower the Hawks rate.

3) Pick three or four other teams to do this for also, and show that using the same % reduction strategies, that these other teams have a higher % of players suspended for PEDs in the same time period you've already defined.

#3 obviously won't be definitive, but it at least would be related to your question about if the Hawks should be treated as having a problem with PEDs or not, whereas what you're currently doing doesn't do anything to answer that question.

Click to expand...

Fair enough but the number says enough (for me) w/out further investigation/comparison. Teams will take their lumps for PED suspensions but in the end it comes down to individuals making poor choices (and in some cases - not just for this team - it could be something as simple as Moffett's case), not a team promoting the behavior. It's absurd that this gets as much air time as it does and in the end, there will be a hand full of people making reference to it because they choose to cling to it but in the grand scheme of things, most reasonable thinking individuals have moved on.

The NFLPA and The League have contracts and policies in place to deal with it. Period. When someone provides audio/video of PC sticking a needle in a player's ass and injecting them w/ HGH, let me know and I'll start to :240039: with the rest...