I think this is an interesting conversation, away from the one we've all been having already. The question is relatively simple, if you were a pro athlete, and you had the chance to take a performance-enhancing drug, whether steroid, HGH, whatever, in order to excel to the point where you could demand in the neighborhood of $5 to $10 million dollars a year on top of your non-enhanced worth, would you do it? My honest answer is almost surely yes. I'm against steroids and all that other chemical crap that athletes are using to get an edge. But if it meant me being that much better than everyone around me, preserving my value to a team, and garnering me more money, I would take the shrinkage and buy better love.
Personally, just because of the health issues down the road I wouldn't. Working your ass off and really lifting can get you to a similar spot that performance-enhancing drugs can in my opinion. Taking steroids is really just the easy way out
If it meant the difference between me being in the show and making millions or being in the minors and riding the bus between Tulsa and Corpus Christi I'd be doing it. I've ridin the bus and it sucks..... no room, bad movies, sometimes the AC breaks. Give me chartered jets, good food, hot groupies and millions. BTW the tend will be the younger kids will say no but the older guys will say yes. Just a guess but life experience means so much.
I think you're probably right. Younger guys don't get just how fast your body breaks down at 30 either. You go from stud to dud overnight, and suddenly you're thinking about all those years you really just wasted. Scrapping a few at the end for the chance to truly enjoy the ones early on, so worth it.
wait, I thought young people were supposed to be stupid? Now you're saying they're smart enough not to take performance enhancers? If I wasn't good enough to play baseball or something else at a high level, I'd find a different profession. I know I can be successful at almost anything. I don't do drugs.
If it means millions of dollars and my family living without having to worry about bills every month, I'd probably do it. The media backlash will only effect the superstars that do it. While I could live without it, being able to accomplish a dream like playing in the majors would make it worth the ride.
Or stupid enough to not realize that they're missing out on being set for life. Good for you, but if we're putting ourselves in the shoes of an aspiring baseball player, it'd be more realistic to say that they aren't likely to be successful at almost anything.
OK, it depends what we're talking about here. If we're talking about a moron playing baseball, they're more likely to do this stuff not because they couldn't do anything else (although that may be the case), but because they're stupid. I'm answering this question from my own perspective.
Umm hell yeah, if it gave me the chance to play baseball for a living and make some pretty damn good money in the process, sign me up. I'm just disappointed that I didnt know any better when I was still young enough to make a career out of it..
This is why I don't get too pissed about people who do steroids. I can't honestly say no to that question. I would like to think that I wouldn't, but I probably would if I were desperate.
If I were an established player already, making $1 million a year or more, no. If I was a fringe player, who could get one big contract with a big year before free agency, absolutely. Take it for one year, get a 5 year deal worth $5-$10 million per, and then stop. Baseball contracts are guaranteed, and that $25 to $50 million makes me set for life. However, I don't think the drugs help enough to do that so it's really a moot point to me.
I'm trying to break into the Pros right now (albeit not at the level at which I'd even make enough to live comfortably off), but I care way too much about my long term health (which may seem hypocritical as a football player who has probably taken 5+ years off his life already before hitting the age of 20 by playing the sport) to ever take anything with proven negative side effects, like an anabolic, or something that the book is not completely out on yet, like HGH... Hell, I don't even take creatine because there are too few extensive studies on what elevated levels of creatine can do negatively to the body....
fuck yeah...after I hit my 79th home run in may I would walk over to the water cooler in the yankee dugout and the water would poor out of my ass like a sprinkler
I have to admit, I was eagerly anticipating your answer. As usual, you did not let me down with your ability to find a new graphic way to answer a question.
Being rich isn't the answer to all of your problems (and I never meant to imply that it was), but all other things being equal, having money definitely makes your life easier than not. Especially when you're talking about being set for life vs. not set for life. In that regard, performance enhancing drugs are a calculated risk. It's very easy for the baseball fans to sit up on their ridiculously high horses and talk about the "integrity of the game" or whatnot... but I've never thought the issue was quite so cut and dry, namely because in nearly any other aspect of life that you can think of, the opposite applies. Does the law school student who gets the best grades in the class because he takes some kind of PED to help him study all night get treated with the same kind of disdain? Of course not. And law school is fiercely competitive (the good ones, anyway), so these can be life-altering decisions. Outright cheating is one thing (cheating on exams, scuffing the ball on the mound, etc.). But - unhealthy though they may be - I have a hard time getting riled up about who takes what to improve their performance.
I probably would not use them, but I could see me using them if I was starting to struggle and a roster spot or my financial well-being was being threatened. If i was a great player I would not use them to get to the next level, but if I was an okay player barely making it by each season, I may use them to boost my ability.
