Originally posted by: Garet Jax
Originally posted by: BlinderBomber
The difference between a sprinter a team sport is HUGE. In running / swimming / whatever, you are primarily competing against the clock. The impact your opponents have is minimal (the only way they can 'effect' you is by being in front / behind). Awarding the medal to the second place finisher is reasonable because each participant acts independently. You can't apply the same logic to the NFL.
Plus, kids get caught cheating in the little league ws, look at that pitcher for NY who was really 14, but had a fake birth certificate that said he was 12.
If the NFL were policing Ben's race, they would have awarded him the gold and banned him from the next 4 races. If this happened, then it would have incented all runners to take drugs to prepare for the olympics since they could still have won gold (the pinnacle of their sport).
I don't agree with the distinction you make between racing and football. I don't believe it is easy to quantify what Ben taking steroids did to his running time on that day, given all the factors to consider including competitors, weather, fans, etc...
The fact is it doesn't matter, he cheated and he shouldn't have been given a gold medal.
The NE pats cheated and they shouldn't have been awarded the win against the jets.
Again, you're trying to compare a team sport to one that is individual. Olympic events are MUCH easier to police because many events are simply individuals against a clock or individuals against a panel of judges. There are no player-player interactions, no teamwork involved. When Merriman, Harrison or ANYONE in the NFL makes a critical interception in a game it's not only because of that individual. It's because of the coaching staff, his teammates, decisions made by the opponent.
You cannot isolate the impact of one player taking performance enhancing drugs from the rest of his team. If you don't believe me, visit footballoutsiders.com. For the past several seasons they've been trying to figure out the value over replacement for individuals in the NFL, much like what is done in MLB. This is very, very, difficult because of how interdependent players are on one another even when they make a very simple play. It's easier in MLB because almost every event that happens in a game can be isolated and factors can be accounted for (we know who was pitching, the count, the weather, the batter, the runners on, etc). In football, we cannot isolate all these factors.
Changing the win for the Patriots doesn't really make sense in my mind either. They were caught videotaping signals. The tape was taken in the first quarter. Their efforts, however devious, had no impact on the game itself. If the tape had been confiscated in the 4th quarter, it might be a different story, but there was no time for any of this tape to actually be used in the game.
Going back to my original point, though, you cannot assign a numeric value to that information. Just like we can't say that a non-roided player would have had three less tackles and one less interception, we cannot say that a non-videotaping team would have scored x fewer points or allowed y more points. There is no way to know any hypothetical outcomes of the game with any degree of certainty. That's why results should stand, regardless of any misconduct that occurred.
Look at Barry Bonds. People want to asterisks his home run total because they believe he took steroids. NOBODY is saying we should go back in games and retroactively give teams wins based on discounting Barry's home-runs. First, it isn't feasible. We don't know WHO would have been batting in Barry's place. Let's say that removing Barry's home runs from games against the New York Mets would award them, on paper, the NL East crown in 2003. (In this scenario let's remove secondary factors beyond just his ABs). What happens now? The Mets would be in your hypothetical playoffs, but we can't hypothetically play all the games out. What if the Mets were matched up against the eventual World Series champion? Who won the World Series?
These hypotheticals are impossible, dangerous, and shouldn't be entertained.