biggus3
Sophomore Member
Posts: 178 
|
Post by biggus3 on Jan 6, 2019 21:01:49 GMT -6
One thing I always thought was interesting was the prevalence of talent in TX, CA, and FL. These states are known narcotics trafficking routes. You can literally walk into a pharmacy in Mexico and buy whatever PEDS you want. Gear has to More of an issue there than other places. It makes no sense that there is so many people in the northeast but the rate that kids come out of there is not nearly as high. CA, TX, and FL all have a lot more going for them, football-wise than proximity to narcotics trafficking routes. Especially Texas. Memphis and Louisville are two of the largest hubs for drug trafficking in the nation, too, because it all goes through there to get distributed to the rest of the eastern USA. I don't see Louisville as hotbed of talent any more than any other major city and Memphis tends to be hit-or-miss with a lot of players who wash out due to academics or discipline. Most narcotics traffickers are affiliated with South American cartels that usually don't deal in steroids and other PEDs, anyway. They see the market and profitability of those things as limited. Most PEDs go through licensed doctors or underground "labs" (which are usually just some guy with a table in his basement or kitchen) that get the powders in bulk from China and then just mix them with some sesame oil and put them in vials or stuff them into capsules. There is some smuggling from Mexico, but not much. This reminds me of another recent thread where somebody said he couldn't believe that HS kids were bench pressing 300lbs or squatting 500, as if it was just unthinkable, because the kids he coached didn't do it. Good to know about the manufacturing in the underground labs. Never knew that. I think the keys to our turn around wasn't the guys that we have pushing huge numbers, we have always had them. Rather it was the middle of the road guys going from squatting 315 ish to 400ish. Nobody that gets on the field is completely mismatched |
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jan 7, 2019 7:32:27 GMT -6
The cost of a single steroid UA is $150 and that excludes the lab collection and testing fees. You have to pay a company to collect, handle and analyze the UA: you can't do it yourself.. A typical steroid test, handling and collection runs around $400: you test a dozen kids and the school pays nearly $5k. And, if a kid does happen to test positive, they take a SECOND confirmatory test that's far more expensive as it's usually gas-chromatography. You'd better friggin' hope that second sample comes back positive as well or the school is getting sued. You're going to find very few school administrators that are willing to shell tens of thousands of dollars each year and risk a lawsuit in the hopes of possibly catching a few kids that -might- be using steroids. I'd much rather see a school pay to test for marijuana and prescription drugs as we know those are major issues in many areas. I think a good cost effective system would be to have every student athlete submit a sample and then have a lottery to decide which couple get tested. I think it would scare the crap out of kids and be a major deterrent. I agree with you that weed and pills are probably the major problem. I have to imagine some company would do for a reasonable cost. You're still paying for $150 for the test and whatever the lab is charging you to handle and store the UAs. So, let's make it a ballpark figure of $200/athlete (that's low-balling it). You'd have to test every kid in every sport. Just for our small football team (50 kids) that would run $10k. The whole school would be looking at $30k in testing for one year. That isn't cost effective. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jan 7, 2019 11:04:08 GMT -6
And have you considered the logistics of a properly done test? They have to ensure chain of custody the whole time. That means some dude is watching. Not just at a glance, it’s not like The Program. It means teenagers getting fully naked and standing face to face with the tester. The whole time.
Is this the hill on which you would like to die?
|
|
|
|
Post by CS on Jan 7, 2019 11:35:49 GMT -6
I think a good cost effective system would be to have every student athlete submit a sample and then have a lottery to decide which couple get tested. I think it would scare the crap out of kids and be a major deterrent. I agree with you that weed and pills are probably the major problem. I have to imagine some company would do for a reasonable cost. You're still paying for $150 for the test and whatever the lab is charging you to handle and store the UAs. So, let's make it a ballpark figure of $200/athlete (that's low-balling it). You'd have to test every kid in every sport. Just for our small football team (50 kids) that would run $10k. The whole school would be looking at $30k in testing for one year. That isn't cost effective. Or you could tell them you are going to do it, don't, and hope that they never find out. That would deter some from rolling the dice. I'm not sure if that's legal so I will defer that idea to the lawyer coaches |
|
|
|
Post by 3rdandlong on Jan 7, 2019 13:30:16 GMT -6
Here in California, I'm far more concerned about vaping than I am steroid use.
|
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jan 7, 2019 13:31:50 GMT -6
Here in California, I'm far more concerned about vaping than I am steroid use. What if they put steriods in their juuls? Or worse, creatine. |
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jan 7, 2019 13:43:55 GMT -6
Here in California, I'm far more concerned about vaping than I am steroid use. What if they put steriods in their juuls? Or worse, creatine. I know a few kids that would actually do that... Funny side story... When I first started coaching we had a kid come into the coaches' office and he was quite distraught.. Billy: "Coach Mr.HC, Johnny bought some steroids and I'm worried about him... Please don't tell him I told you though..: Coach Mr.HC: "What makes you think that, Billy?" Billy: "He's got a bottle of pills in his locker.." So, we went and raided his locker and found a prescription bottle with the label torn off. We popped it open and found friggin' fish oil tablets. When we confronted the kid about it, we had the hardest time not laughing at him. He begrudgingly informed us that he paid $100 from some meathead at a Gold's Gym for a bottle of friggin' fish oil pills. |
|
biggus3
Sophomore Member
Posts: 178
|
Post by biggus3 on Jan 7, 2019 13:49:21 GMT -6
And have you considered the logistics of a properly done test? They have to ensure chain of custody the whole time. That means some dude is watching. Not just at a glance, it’s not like The Program. It means teenagers getting fully naked and standing face to face with the tester. The whole time. Is this the hill on which you would like to die? I'm not sure it Has to be like that. I work construction as a side gig and I had to take a drug test. I went in the bathroom by myself and came out with a sample. I signed a piece of paper and was in and out of the testing facility in less than 10 minutes. It wasn't uncomfortable at all. I'm sure if we went on a crusade to stamp out all drug use, we would do it in the extremely thorough way that you are describing. I don't want that I just want a tool to act as a deterrent to the use in the first place. If a kid wants to go to extreme lengths to beat the test, then those drugs must be very I mportant to them and they have other issues. My district is a billion dollar a year operation. They spend $187,000 every time it snows to plow the parking lots. They can turn the AC off in the summer (which they already do for a week) for an extra day and find money for this. As a general rule, I don't die on any hill. I'm a soldier and will morph into whatever I need to be to keep this job because I have bills to pay. There are lots of things I would change if I was czar of my district, but things that bother me the most are when we throw common sense out the window because admin is afraid to have difficult conversations. |
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jan 7, 2019 14:12:49 GMT -6
And have you considered the logistics of a properly done test? They have to ensure chain of custody the whole time. That means some dude is watching. Not just at a glance, it’s not like The Program. It means teenagers getting fully naked and standing face to face with the tester. The whole time. Is this the hill on which you would like to die? I'm not sure it Has to be like that. I work construction as a side gig and I had to take a drug test. I went in the bathroom by myself and came out with a sample. I signed a piece of paper and was in and out of the testing facility in less than 10 minutes. It wasn't uncomfortable at all. I'm sure if we went on a crusade to stamp out all drug use, we would do it in the extremely thorough way that you are describing. I don't want that I just want a tool to act as a deterrent to the use in the first place. If a kid wants to go to extreme lengths to beat the test, then those drugs must be very I mportant to them and they have other issues. My district is a billion dollar a year operation. They spend $187,000 every time it snows to plow the parking lots. They can turn the AC off in the summer (which they already do for a week) for an extra day and find money for this. As a general rule, I don't die on any hill. I'm a soldier and will morph into whatever I need to be to keep this job because I have bills to pay. There are lots of things I would change if I was czar of my district, but things that bother me the most are when we throw common sense out the window because admin is afraid to have difficult conversations. Common sense says "Don't spend $30k per year hoping to deter kids from using steroids because we THINK they're using steroids." |
|
biggus3
Sophomore Member
Posts: 178
|
Post by biggus3 on Jan 7, 2019 15:00:59 GMT -6
I'm not sure it Has to be like that. I work construction as a side gig and I had to take a drug test. I went in the bathroom by myself and came out with a sample. I signed a piece of paper and was in and out of the testing facility in less than 10 minutes. It wasn't uncomfortable at all. I'm sure if we went on a crusade to stamp out all drug use, we would do it in the extremely thorough way that you are describing. I don't want that I just want a tool to act as a deterrent to the use in the first place. If a kid wants to go to extreme lengths to beat the test, then those drugs must be very I mportant to them and they have other issues. My district is a billion dollar a year operation. They spend $187,000 every time it snows to plow the parking lots. They can turn the AC off in the summer (which they already do for a week) for an extra day and find money for this. As a general rule, I don't die on any hill. I'm a soldier and will morph into whatever I need to be to keep this job because I have bills to pay. There are lots of things I would change if I was czar of my district, but things that bother me the most are when we throw common sense out the window because admin is afraid to have difficult conversations. Common sense says "Don't spend $30k per year hoping to deter kids from using steroids because we THINK they're using steroids." Look, I really don't want a district wide testing program even though I think we could afford it. You are right in that it's probably a waste of money for those populations. I want to be able to test kids on our team. We had a major turn around and one of the things that changed was where we trained at. That place has steroids there. We have the money in the program to do it but we can't. I think for our population, the football team, the odds of them using steroids is much greater. I think it's worth blowing a little cash to at least make it look like we are trying to do things the right way. I am sure that as another poster suggested, we are being accused of doping from other teams and I along with our head coach would like it to be known that we do random testing. We can't because of red tape. I think that's dumb. |
|
|
|
Post by fkaboneyard on Jan 7, 2019 21:40:11 GMT -6
And have you considered the logistics of a properly done test? They have to ensure chain of custody the whole time. That means some dude is watching. Not just at a glance, it’s not like The Program. It means teenagers getting fully naked and standing face to face with the tester. The whole time. Is this the hill on which you would like to die? I'm not sure it Has to be like that. I work construction as a side gig and I had to take a drug test. I went in the bathroom by myself and came out with a sample. I signed a piece of paper and was in and out of the testing facility in less than 10 minutes. It wasn't uncomfortable at all. I'm sure if we went on a crusade to stamp out all drug use, we would do it in the extremely thorough way that you are describing. I don't want that I just want a tool to act as a deterrent to the use in the first place. If a kid wants to go to extreme lengths to beat the test, then those drugs must be very I mportant to them and they have other issues. My district is a billion dollar a year operation. They spend $187,000 every time it snows to plow the parking lots. They can turn the AC off in the summer (which they already do for a week) for an extra day and find money for this. As a general rule, I don't die on any hill. I'm a soldier and will morph into whatever I need to be to keep this job because I have bills to pay. There are lots of things I would change if I was czar of my district, but things that bother me the most are when we throw common sense out the window because admin is afraid to have difficult conversations.
So kids would just start getting Whizzinators. I don't get the idea that a school would spend a huge amount of $$ on such a small target audience. There are certainly areas where schools could get a better return on their investment. That's my $.02.
|
|
biggus3
Sophomore Member
Posts: 178
|
Post by biggus3 on Jan 8, 2019 1:44:27 GMT -6
I'm not sure it Has to be like that. I work construction as a side gig and I had to take a drug test. I went in the bathroom by myself and came out with a sample. I signed a piece of paper and was in and out of the testing facility in less than 10 minutes. It wasn't uncomfortable at all. I'm sure if we went on a crusade to stamp out all drug use, we would do it in the extremely thorough way that you are describing. I don't want that I just want a tool to act as a deterrent to the use in the first place. If a kid wants to go to extreme lengths to beat the test, then those drugs must be very I mportant to them and they have other issues. My district is a billion dollar a year operation. They spend $187,000 every time it snows to plow the parking lots. They can turn the AC off in the summer (which they already do for a week) for an extra day and find money for this. As a general rule, I don't die on any hill. I'm a soldier and will morph into whatever I need to be to keep this job because I have bills to pay. There are lots of things I would change if I was czar of my district, but things that bother me the most are when we throw common sense out the window because admin is afraid to have difficult conversations.
So kids would just start getting Whizzinators. I don't get the idea that a school would spend a huge amount of $$ on such a small target audience. There are certainly areas where schools could get a better return on their investment. That's my $.02.
Some schools find it necessary to spend huge amounts on metal detectors and extra security for a very small segment that is bringing weapons to school. That is that schools issue. Maybe another school has a rampant drug problem and feels the need to implement drug testing for athletes. We have found out here that happens in some places. School leadership should have the flexibility to spend money to address issues unique to their school and not be afraid of blowback if they are truly acting in the students best interest In my case, I think our team is at great risk for using PEDS. I would like to use fundraised dollars to at least try to address it but we can't, even though the law seemingly (I'm not a lawyer) supports our right to so. The lack of backbone and common sense from our admin makes me really cynical I kind of secretly hope that our kids get ahold of the good stuff, someone smart shows them how to use them safely and we ride our way to glory on the backs of some knuckle draggers. After we run power for 12 yards 8 times in a row right down your defense, you'll wish we had a more sensible drug testing policy. |
|
|
|
Post by wolverine55 on Jan 8, 2019 7:33:58 GMT -6
I'll probably just bow out of this discussion after this, because this is where I have trouble relating: my first thought after a team has run all over us has never been, "Damn, they must be juicing..."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2019 8:13:01 GMT -6
I'll probably just bow out of this discussion after this, because this is where I have trouble relating: my first thought after a team has run all over us has never been, "Damn, they must be juicing..." The only time in my life I've ever suspected an opponent of juicing was my freshman year of HS, when we went to play a regional powerhouse on the road in late October in 30 degree weather and their starting OL were all 250lbs+ with their shirts rolled up to show off their 6 packs. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jan 8, 2019 8:14:48 GMT -6
If you’re just wanting to put a scare into them have them pee in cups and then throw it out. It only needs to be a semi-credible threat.
|
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jan 8, 2019 10:22:08 GMT -6
If you’re just wanting to put a scare into them have them pee in cups and then throw it out. It only needs to be a semi-credible threat. "They're kids. Scare 'em.". Crash Davis |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2019 10:49:15 GMT -6
If you’re just wanting to put a scare into them have them pee in cups and then throw it out. It only needs to be a semi-credible threat. Some parent would probably still find a way to sue, or at least cause a lot of drama, over that. Then if he does that and some of the kids actually are juicing, and they don't get busted, rumors are going to go around over how the crooked coach is covering for his players' juicing. You need to pick your battles (and threats) in this profession. |
|
biggus3
Sophomore Member
Posts: 178
|
Post by biggus3 on Jan 8, 2019 13:15:11 GMT -6
I'll probably just bow out of this discussion after this, because this is where I have trouble relating: my first thought after a team has run all over us has never been, "Damn, they must be juicing..." I agree with you, that is the last thing on my mind too, but if it came out that was the case I would be pissed. |
|
biggus3
Sophomore Member
Posts: 178
|
Post by biggus3 on Jan 8, 2019 13:24:51 GMT -6
I really believe that all roads lead to lawsuit when dealing with schools. If one of our kids gets messed up because he got steroids from the gym we train at, somehow we were complicit or negligent and are to be held responsible. If we test and someone gets a violation we will get sued. I sleep better at night erring on the side of taking action and looking out for kids.
|
|
|
|
Post by nicku on Jan 8, 2019 13:45:45 GMT -6
Wish we had kids that wanted to win so badly that they'd juice lol
|
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jan 8, 2019 14:15:58 GMT -6
I really believe that all roads lead to lawsuit when dealing with schools. If one of our kids gets messed up because he got steroids from the gym we train at, somehow we were complicit or negligent and are to be held responsible. If we test and someone gets a violation we will get sued. I sleep better at night erring on the side of taking action and looking out for kids. No, you're not going to get sued if some kid screws himself up, buying steroids from some meathead at Gold's Gym. The dealer will be prosecuted and Gold's could get sued if they're turning a blind eye to it. Do all of the fundraising you want but you'd better plan on coming up with enough cash to drug test all of the athletes (male and female): welcome to Title IX. It doesn't just work to ensure equality for girl's sports: it goes the other way as well. This has nothing to do with getting sued over drug testing: many, many schools in this country drug test their athletes and it's completely legal as it's extracurricular. This has been tried in state courts several times and the parents have lost repeatedly because the kids aren't required to participate in athletics. If they want to participate, then they agree to p-ss in a cup. If they don't, then they don't play: it's that simple. We do it and we've had no issues whatsoever. A few parents threw a fit over it but the response from the administration, community and school board was simple: "They don't have to play." If you WERE the district's superintendent, you'd get laughed out of the room by the school board when you proposed steroid testing. No school board is going to shell over a hundreds of thousand dollars over the space over a few years because you SUSPECT that a handful of kids are using steroids, based on their performance on the field. Good Lord, even the NCAA only randomly tests a few athletes per team every year because it's so friggin' expensive. And, again, the "reasonably" priced tests aren't terribly reliable. I competed in a "natural" powerlifting federation for awhile that required UAs. There were plenty of guys that found ways around the tests; either through using a drug that doesn't show up on the test or by only using short acting steroids that got out of their systems quickly. They openly admitted to it at the gym and it's one of reasons why I gave up powerlifting. |
|
|
|
Post by cfoott on Jan 16, 2019 17:06:44 GMT -6
Could you report it to the child welfare offices under the mandated reporting laws of your state? If you are able to, you don't need to have concrete evidence.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coach.A on Jan 16, 2019 22:18:27 GMT -6
If admin were to approve steroid testing, where would it stop? Would they test for students using adderall (illegally) to improve test scores? Would they also test drama and band students for use of beta blockers during auditions?
All of these drugs are considered performance enhancers in their respective competitive areas (athletics, academics, auditions).
|
|
