Do these two situation seem eerily similar??

[madinmaryland]

Roger Clemens: Sure-fire Hall of Famer, kept retiring, waffling and coming back late at the end of his career. Surprisingly productive seasons after he seemingly had lost a step. Turned out, at least to my way of thinking, he was avoiding the MLB drug testing program by being retired in the offseason.

Brett Favre: Sure-fire Hall of Famer, kept retiring, waffling and coming back late at the end of his career. Surprisingly productive seasons after he seemingly had lost a step. ...

Makes you wonder, doesn't it.

[joeybee12]

1. Even if he isn't doing steroids, Favor is

an ass of the highest order.

[Auggie]

2. Aren't players randomly tested during the season?

From the New York Times, January 25th, 2007:

"Under the policy changes announced yesterday, the number of players randomly tested each week during the preseason, regular season and postseason would increase to 10 from 7 per team. Last year, the N.F.L. increased the maximum number of times a player could be tested in the off-season to six times from two. Combined, those changes should amount to more than 12,000 drug tests administered to about 1,800 players next season, an increase of about 2,000 tests. (Gene) Upshaw said that off-season testing would begin more quickly after the end of the regular season. That testing used to start in late March but will now begin in February to decrease the time period when players are not subjected to random testing."

LINK: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/25/sports/football/25steroids.html

Old link, I know. That's why I'm asking.

[petronius]

3. But if they're not officially players in the off-season, they won't be tested

Perhaps there are banned substances that could enhance off-season training, but not be detected during in-season testing? So, a player could 'retire,' bulk up in the off-season, and then decide at the beginning of the season to make a 'surprise' comeback.

I have no clue if it applies to these cases, but I'm sure someone has thought about it...

[Auggie]

4. Good question. I don't know the answer.

[flvegan]

5. 30 days.

The rule of thumb is that even the heaviest cycle of anabolics will be all but traceless 30 days after ending the cycle. The problem is these guys would need a post-cycle recovery to get their natural test in gear, so if they had 60 days, they could easily pull it off. So if they have 4 months from end of season (retire) to spring training (unretire), they could pull one serious cycle (two months one, one month off) during that time.

[petronius]

6. That would be enough to produce a season-enhancing benefit, right?

I would guess that a team would have to be complicit (or at least aware) to make it worthwhile - the player would want to know he had somewhere to go back to...

[flvegan]

7. Oh gosh, yes.

For a pitcher/QB it would be a different type of cycle as they'd likely be looking for a bit of increase in strength, but the healing qualities alone might last the entire season.

Good example, a linebacker could easily put on 20 lbs of muscle in that short period of time.

[petronius]

8. Wow... That would certainly be worth a charade

Especially if the charade had the side-benefit of putting you in the headlines for the whole off-season...