ESPN Article on Suckeye Druggies
- Thread starter loboclone
- Start date
"We have not caught anybody getting around the system," Barta said. "Unfortunately, there's enough evidence in our protocol to say we have to tighten up. It's pretty likely that someone -- I don't know if it's 1 or 21 -- someone has gotten around this process.
Interesting choice of words by Barta. Did anyone else notice what this statement doesn't say? It doesn't say whether players failed a drug test for the first time. It is important to note that you only get suspended for 10% of games if you fail two tests.
This statement says that they haven't caught anyone trying to cheat on the test not whether players actually failed their test. Nice play on words to create the perception that there aren't a bunch of players that failed drug tests.
I didn't listen to the press conference, so maybe they made a direct statement about whether players failed drug tests. If not, this looks like typical Iowa spin designed to mask the real story.
Did not see the PC. Did anyone in the press have the insight/courage to at least directly ask the question, "Did any players fail the recent drug test for their 1st or 2nd time?" It would have been interesting to see how that question would be dodged. Clearly, if not a single player failed the most recent test, Barta and UI would have made that known for sure.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
Here is a general question not pertaining to Iowa or any specific university....
If you are a public university and you catch an athlete breaking the law why are you not required to turn them over to the proper authorities?
Player A tests positive for cocaine on his drug test. Obviously this player has broken the law by using and possessing an illegal drug. As a state funded university shouldn't they be required to turn that player over to the local authorities?
If you are a public university and you catch an athlete breaking the law why are you not required to turn them over to the proper authorities?
Player A tests positive for cocaine on his drug test. Obviously this player has broken the law by using and possessing an illegal drug. As a state funded university shouldn't they be required to turn that player over to the local authorities?
1-2 games suspension for the 2nd positive test. Solid
The article also said the players are tested at least once per year, but it didn't say how often the players are re-tested after they turn in a positive test. Maybe they are tested once during the season and then if they have a positive test, they are tested one more time at the end of the season. That way there are no suspensions and the coaches and players are happy. Very solid policy you have there.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
Exactly. And the tests from the NCAA and Big Ten are for performance-enhancing drugs, not recreational.
So you need to be clean about one day per year, and there's no discussion of follow-up.
Also, the question about a clean test indicating possession is an interesting one. What are the ramifications of that? Doesn't that require a police notification, or is that somehow considered a privacy thing? (I ask the privacy question because it seems like a catch-all in organizations.)
If a player tests positive on a drug test does the university report that to the NCAA? If not then how in the hell would anyone even know who has failed a test, how many times they have failed a test, or if they were even administered a test? As for their policy... DJKilo could have tested positive multiple times and nobody would ever find out about it. Let's face it... the only reason any of this stuff at the U of I came to light is because DJKilo got busted by the police. If not for that nobody knows anything about what is going on at the U of I. No press conference is held to spin the story because there is no story.
Based on Barta's statement. I would guess the deficiencies in their protocol have led to very few positives prior to correcting them. The users would just exploit the lack of protocol to avoid a positive result.
The recently administered tests are probably the first to provide accurate results. Barta's statement does more to confirm that a large number failed tests then it does to refute it. Sadly, his statement will probably be enough to placate the fans that just want this to go away.
from the presser:
Q: Any more drug tests since DJK arrest?
Gary: We drug test just about every week, so for all sports, yes. Not out of the ordinary. We do it every week. We didnt ramp up a new drug testing program since last week
There wasn't a team wide drug test. How can there be a large number of failed results when there wasn't a large number of tests?
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
If that's the complaint people want to make, that's fair.
The athletic dept isn't without blame. They had a player living in a drug house. It's not KF's job to know where everyone lives, but it's not like he's a one man coaching staff. Somebody should have known about that.
But stop with the BS. There weren't 20 failed tests. There likely weren't 20 tests period.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
Agreed on all counts here. One of the best posts so far today. There's almost no way that there were 20 failed tests, last week or otherwise.
Obviously his statement placated you, yet he never stated whether there were failed drug tests as a result of tightening protocol.
You just lost one running back for good and another for the bowl game, but everything is a okay because we haven't caught anyone trying to cheat the testing protocol.
Spare me the spin.
Unless you have proof of how many tests were administered, and how many were failed you're just stating an opinion, so it is no more factual then any other opinion or rumor.
:swoon:
The DJK arrest was what, a week ago? He said and I quote "We didn't ramp up a new drug testing system since last week"
Athletic directors always hold press conferences to tell us that they haven't caught anyone trying to cheat on drug testing protocols. That makes perfect sense.
You only see what you want to see.