May 1, 2013, 2:30 PM EST
Here’s a thought experiment: take every fact asserted and every quote offered in this article about HGH use and testing in the NFL and replace the proper nouns with baseball players and baseball teams. And then ask yourself how thick the walls would have to be on your backyard shelter to withstand the nuclear fallout from all of the outrage that would come from the sporting press:
As soon as the three letters are mentioned – H-G-H – the player laughs. Human growth hormone? In the NFL? Come on. HGH use is rampant, this NFC starter says. ”It’s like clockwork nowadays,” he said, estimating 10-15 players on each team use the banned substance. “Not tested and it’s easy to get. Nowadays, dude? In 2013? (Expletive) yeah. I’m just being real.” …
… Twenty-one months after agreeing to a test, HGH remains a part of the NFL. That’s the cold, unsettling reality. ”Until they start testing for it, it’s not illegal, right?” [Darren] Woodson said. “It’s just a dirty game. I’ve always felt it was that way.”
Thing is, a lot of people in that article make good points about the use and efficacy of HGH. But you’re not allowed to talk about that in baseball. Orthodoxy mandates that HGH is evil, squeezed from The Devil’s glands and used only by those of blackest heart. And they turn you from a crappy player to a Hall of Famer overnight. Except the Hall of Fame part, because we won’t have you there if you dare use HGH.
Why does football get to actually talk about this stuff? Why aren’t any sportswriters giving up on football and damning that whole lot to Hell?
- Ian Kinsler hopes Rangers go 0-162, calls GM a “sleazeball” (132)
- Albert Pujols was insulted when someone asked him if he can put up Mike Trout numbers (102)
- The politics of “The Cardinal Way” (67)
- Robinson Cano wants the Mariners to bring in Kendrys Morales and Ervin Santana (64)
- Reporter calls Ian Kinsler as self-absorbed as A-Rod (60)