Haslett points finger at Steelers of '70s

[miami_fan]

I am trying to figure out what exactly would be the purpose of this admission? :confused:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2020408

New Orleans Saints head coach Jim Haslett admitted to taking steroids for a short time as an NFL player before they were banned, and estimated that half of the league's players in the 1980s were users, according to published reports.

Haslett, a Pro Bowl linebacker during his nine-year NFL career, also told some reporters at the league's meetings in Hawaii that he believes steroids use in the NFL began with the Steelers in the 1970s.

"If you didn't [take steroids], you weren't as strong as everybody else, you weren't as fast as everybody else," Haslett said in reports in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Los Angeles Times. "That's the only reason to do it. Everybody's looking for a competitive edge."

The NFL began testing for banned substances in 1987, although it did not begin suspending players for steroid use until 1989. The league introduced random testing in 1990 and the policy was written into the collective bargaining agreement in 1993. Currently, a player receives a four-game suspension for his first positive test, a six-game suspension for a second and a one-season ban for a third. No one has tested positive more than once, NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said.

Haslett, who played at Indiana University of Pennsylvania and was drafted by Buffalo in the second round in 1979, said he took steroids for six weeks during one offseason early in his career.

"I didn't think it was very good for you. I was hyper all the time. Got bloated, a fat face," he said in the published reports.

Haslett played in Buffalo from 1979 to 1985, and finished his career in 1987 with the New York Jets.

Haslett, who said that "all the offensive and defensive linemen, linebackers" were steroids users during his playing career, said the Steelers of the 1970s were big users. The Steelers won four Super Bowls in six years, beginning in 1974-75.

"It started, really, in Pittsburgh," Haslett said in the Post-Gazette. "They got an advantage on a lot of football teams. They were so much stronger [in the] '70s, late '70s, early '80s ... They're the ones who kind of started it."

Team chairman Dan Rooney refuted Haslett's accusation.

"This is totally, totally false when he says it started with the Steelers in the '70s," Rooney told the newspaper. "Chuck Noll was totally against it. He looked into it, examined it, talked to people. Haslett, maybe it affected his mind.

"Noll told the players, 'Hey, this stuff doesn't do you any good. If you just do the work, lift, things like that, you'll be all right.' "

At least one Steelers player from that era has admitted using steroids. Steve Courson, a part-time starter on Pittsburgh's last Super Bowl title team in 1979, has blamed a heart condition on steroid use. Courson has also said that teammates such as Jack Ham and Jack Lambert adamantly refused to use them.

Haslett, who estimated his playing weight at 252, described his experience with steroids to reporters.

"I didn't put weight on, I just got strong," he said. "If you lift on Monday, usually you lift Wednesday, Friday. [On steroids], you can lift like Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday. You never got tired.

Continued...

[miami_fan]

Haslett points finger at Steelers of '70s (Cont.)


"Your muscles recovered from it. When you lift, your muscle tears down and the blood comes in and repairs it. It takes bout 28 to 40 hours for the blood to repair the muscle. When you take steroids and it rips the muscle, the blood immediately flows in there, and it repairs itself right away. That's why you never feel tired, you never feel sore.

"You can lift every day, you can recover right away. My bench went from 440 to 480 in about six weeks."

Haslett, coach of the Saints since 2000, said the league got a handle on the steroids problem long ago.

"I'm comfortable our steroid policy is very effective," NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue told the LA Times. "And no, I can't say I'm comfortable with things not slipping through the cracks, because THG [human growth hormone] slipped through everyone's cracks because it was not a known substance and there was no test for it. And now that there's a test for it, we're testing.

"I think we have a very strong program and very pervasive testing and very severe penalties and minimum number of violations. But is it perfect? No."

Information from The Associated Press was used in this report.

[JeeberD]

Isn't it pretty common knowledge that steroids were pretty common in the NFL during that time frame? :confused:

[Franklinnoble]

Two Words:

Lyle Alzado

[Tigercat]

Hmm, my Dad works out with Haz these days, should I be concerned?

[QuikSand]

Isn't it pretty common knowledge that steroids were pretty common in the NFL during that time frame?

From what I can tell, there is a sizable community of people who, whenever this general topic is broached, seem to demand absolute, unassailable proof before conceding that there has ever been any use of any steroids by anyone. Suggesting something ic common knowledge is, with these folks, basically itching for a fight.

Be warned.

[Arles]

I guess that means now that the entire Steelers dynasty = Barry Bonds from a credibility standpoint, correct?

[rkmsuf]

I guess that means now that the entire Steelers dynasty = Barry Bonds from a credibility standpoint, correct?

No it's Haslett. He's cooky.

[Arles]

No it's Haslett. He's cooky.
As cooky as Canseco?

[JeeberD]

No it's Haslett. He's cooky.

He's a chef?

[rkmsuf]

As cooky as Canseco?

Good one. They should get together and bake cookies.

[weinstein7]

Good one. They should get together and bake cookies.

Can you make steroid cookies?

[dawgfan]

From what I can tell, there is a sizable community of people who, whenever this general topic is broached, seem to demand absolute, unassailable proof before conceding that there has ever been any use of any steroids by anyone. Suggesting something ic common knowledge is, with these folks, basically itching for a fight.

Be warned.

For shame Quik. You're making an incorrect and exaggerated extrapolation - you're better than this.

As someone that took issue with people saying Bonds was absolutely for sure on steroids (pre-leaked Grand Jury testimony), my point wasn't to deny that there were likely a number of players in baseball on steroids, simply to point out that at the time, we didn't know for sure that Bonds was. At the time, all we had was circumstantial evidence which made for a lot of assumptions. I never denied that Bonds was probably on steroids, just simply pointing out that we couldn't be sure.

It should be noted that we still don't know for sure that he was - all the leaked Grand Jury testimony did was confirm that Bonds used "the cream" and "the clear", with the assumption those were the same substances that the prosecution in the BALCO case has shown to be steroids/HGH/whatever.

You're smart enough to realize that assuming a number of players have used steroids does not equal this specific player/players have used steroids.

I suspect that Mark McGwire, Barry Bonds and others (probably Brett Boone, perhaps Sammy Sosa) have used steroids, but I don't know they did (though the evidence is pretty compelling at this point for Bonds and to a lesser extent McGwire).

[QuikSand]

For shame Quik. You're making an incorrect and exaggerated extrapolation...

No, I am just properly employing hyperbole to reflect my disdain for the argument.

I suspect that Mark McGwire, Barry Bonds and others (probably Brett Boone, perhaps Sammy Sosa) have used steroids, but I don't know they did (though the evidence is pretty compelling at this point for Bonds and to a lesser extent McGwire).

And while technically correct, this reeks of the perspective I reject.

No, I cannot conclusve prove that any one of the specific players you mentiond used steroids. But I, unlike others, am not going to let that matter get in the way of my personal judgment about them.

Based on the best encapsulation of what I know about athletes, sports, steroids, and Barry Bonds... I have reached the conclusion that he's a steroid user. It doesn't matter to me whether I or anyone else can prove it beyond a shred of doubt... I'm not worried about that standard... it's just my opinion of him, that's all that's in the balance here.

I reject the notion that I, reaching my own (admittedly completely immatrial) personal verdict on this matter, have any responsibility to be beholden to some higher standard of proof. He's a punk. That's what I think, end of story.

[kcchief19]

No, I am just properly employing hyperbole to reflect my disdain for the argument. Tremendous sentence. A-plus work.

If the resolution at debate is whether steroids were rampant in the NFL in the 1970s and '80s, I think the evidence at hand suggest the affirmative answer is correct. Countless players from that era have admitted to using steroids and several of them have died directly or indirectly from their use, such as Lyle Alzado and Mike Webster. It would stand to reason that if many if not most NFL players in that era used steroids, certainly a sizable number of the best players used steroids. It would seem unlikely given that scenario that on the best team in football at the time no one used steroids.

As for the argument that it taints the Steelers success akin to tainting the success of Bonds, I'm ambivalent on that point. Certainly some key members of the Steelers were not using steroids. I hate to think steroids were responsbile to the physique of Terry Bradshaw. If so, he must have really been a scrawny runt to begin. Plus, regardless of the morality of using steroids, can it really taint an accomplishment if the practice was not against the rules at the time and many opponents gained a similar advantage?

I often read and hear complaints about Bonds' and his record being tainted, but I rarely hear someone say, "I'm amazed at how successful Jorge Cantu is considering he doesn't use steroids."

[clintl]

I think the larger point is that the NFL had a steroid problem, and didn't do anything about it for a decade, and when it decided to do something, it took two years before it decided to start suspending players. In fact, the time frame from the beginning of the problem to real action to solve is almost identical to what has gone on in MLB. And yet there's a witch hunt in MLB, and an almost free pass for the NFL. And this despite the fact that steroids are very obviously more beneficial to an NFL player because football is a game of strength, where baseball is a game of timing (something steroids do little, if anything, to help).

[dawgfan]

No, I am just properly employing hyperbole to reflect my disdain for the argument.

And yet you missed my point - there's a difference between saying I'm not 100% persuaded that player X is using/has used steroids and saying I'm 100% sure that some, even many players in a particular sport have used/are using steroids. To imply that because I've made arguments regarding the former, and thus I reject the latter is an extrapolation with no merit.

Poor logic on your part Quik, which is why I'm surprised and disappointed.

[Arles]

I think the larger point is that the NFL had a steroid problem, and didn't do anything about it for a decade, and when it decided to do something, it took two years before it decided to start suspending players. In fact, the time frame from the beginning of the problem to real action to solve is almost identical to what has gone on in MLB. And yet there's a witch hunt in MLB, and an almost free pass for the NFL. And this despite the fact that steroids are very obviously more beneficial to an NFL player because football is a game of strength, where baseball is a game of timing (something steroids do little, if anything, to help).
Bingo - and you can replace older baseball players with greenies in this as well. It's as if Barry Bonds and Mark McGwire were the first to use performance enhancing drugs in professional sports given the level of outrage. Here's the exact story I knew would come that proves the point:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2020890
Players need 75 percent of the vote to get into the Hall.

McGwire got just 55.6 percent support from those who gave a yes/no response
I bet many of the people that voted no against McGwire would go home and tell their kids what great athletes the 70s Steelers, Aaron (greenies) and Mays (red juice) were. :rolleyes:

[Crapshoot]

Arlie, rock on! I don't think you and I have ever been in such agreement on a topic.. :D

[Arles]

I know, you, Blackadar and myself all in agreement on a topic. Must be a sign of the apocalypse :p

[QuikSand]

And yet you missed my point - there's a difference between saying I'm not 100% persuaded that player X is using/has used steroids and saying I'm 100% sure that some, even many players in a particular sport have used/are using steroids. To imply that because I've made arguments regarding the former, and thus I reject the latter is an extrapolation with no merit.

Poor logic on your part Quik, which is why I'm surprised and disappointed.

I concede.

To the extent you took this as a personal slight against you (which it wasn't -- hell, I don't even remember who the people are who, in my judgment have been making these arguments, only that I disagree with them), and that my point was misguided in that respect, I apologize.

My quarrel is with the faulty argument, not the people, anyway. If you haven't made the faulty argument, you're off the hook anyway. (Or so it woudl seem to me)

[BigJohn&TheLions]

I guess the main problem with is team is that they can't take 'roids... Not the fact that they suck.

[weinstein7]

Interesting follow-up to this in the local paper:

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050326/SPORTS03/503260338/1007/SPORTS

My favorite quote, from former Bill and Hall of Famer Joe DaLamielleurre:

"I never took one in my life, and if Haslett took them like he said he did, he must have been getting placebos because I played against him and he wasn't that strong."

Zing!