Suspension is sufficient

CLICK TO REACT

While the Associated Press certainly has a right to call for a re-vote on both the DROY and All-Pro teams, I think it's chiefly an ill-conceived publicity stunt, a reactionary move made in response to the performance enhancing drug hysteria that has gripped baseball.

Brian Cushing reportedly tested positive for a non-steroidal banned substance on a single occasion in September of 2009. He played the remainder of the 2009 NFL season at a nearly unimaginable level of excellence for a rookie, repeatedly passing multiple additional drug tests along the way. Under any interpretation, it's illogical to believe that Cushing's single, tested failure in September had an unfair or unjust affect on his play in October, November, December, and/or January. I believe the AP's decision to re-vote is little more than a reactionary witch hunt. When viewed objectively (which could admittedly be beyond my abilities as a fan of the Houston Texans), if a voter deemed Brian Cushing the outstanding defensive rookie of the 2009 season during the original voting process, that voter should still consider Cushing the defensive rookie of the year.

Brian Cushing violated the NFL's policy on performance-enhancing drugs. He'll miss the first four games of the 2010 NFL season. That, and not a short-sighted attempt to strip him of honors earned during his rookie season, is punishment enough. He'll do his time, as he should. The AP doesn't need to pile on.

By Tim McHale  |  May 12, 2010; 12:00 AM ET  | Category:  Houston Texans , NFL , NFL Rules , Roger Goodell , Steroids Save & Share:                 
Previous: The pressure to perform | Next: Policy holes lead to undeserving winners

The comments to this entry are closed.