Derrick Rose: Why He Should Stand Behind PED Comments
Derrick Rose Should Have Stood by His Statements
Since, Rose has come out and said he did "not recall making the statement nor do I recall the question being asked."
It's obvious why Rose is backtracking because he doesn't want to be that new player who blew the horn on the rest of the league.
But Rose should have stuck by his comments, because the issue needs to be addressed (and no, I don't believe he did "not recall the question being asked.")
Now, it doesn't appear as if the problem is rampant to the level of baseball's "Steroid Era," but even if one out of five players is doing it, that's still an advantage, possibly creating a discrepancy in what would otherwise be an even matchup.
If Rose did indeed say what he said, it was a good thing for the NBA—although if his comments end up revealing a larger issue, it could start a domino effect that ends up lowering the overall level of play.
His statements also pointed to the bigger picture that performance-enhancing drugs find their way in numerous professional sports, whether it's baseball, football, cycling or, yes, basketball.
Should the NBA crack down harder on PED use?
The NBA has largely avoided the questions of PED use, but they were bound to come around sooner or later, and this may be the time the league should be forced to crack down harder.
Rose added in his denial that NBA players get tested four times, so if there was a problem, it would be uncovered.
We all know that's not true.
I feel like those who run professional sports will only seriously look at taking their best players out of the game if the necessary pressure forces them to, be it the fans or media or whomever.
Additionally, there are plenty of drugs that hide performance-enhancing drugs and plenty of ways athletes have discovered to cover up their use throughout the years.
Does the NBA really want its next promising stars exposed, and, in turn, the league?
Do we want another Barry Bonds/Lance Armstrong situation?
Rose should be commended for what he said originally, but his denial afterward exposes the real problem: that the problem is being hidden from us and not being taken seriously enough.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?