Fighting Words: Did Cushing deserve it?

Joachim Clarke: Stand by your man

Brian Cushing deserved to win the re-vote of AP defensive Rookie of the Year regardless of what the NFL says he took. Cushing has been banned for four games for testing positive for HCG, a non-steroidal substance that increases natural testosterone production. Cushing denies the use of HCG and is basically saying that having HCG levels over the allowed limit is a natural occurrence in his body and he worries that this might occur again.

But regardless of whether or not Cushing took a banned substance, the vote was re-cast and he kept his award. Even though he won with 18 votes instead of 39 before the revelation of his alleged PED use, Cushing still deserves the award because truthfully, he was the best defensive rookie of the year. Apparently the AP panel of broadcasters and writers who vote on these things agree with me.

The re-vote is silly. What’s done is done and we just came to the same conclusion anyway. I personally don’t think that Cushing intentionally took any performance-enhancing drugs. I’m also a diehard Texans fan and incredibly biased, but that’s beside the point.

Tristan Tippet: Who cares anyway?

It’s very simple. Here was a chance for people in the football world to reaffirm their stance on PED usage and they did. Their stance is that taking PEDs and getting caught is not enough of an offense to have a postseason award taken away. If that’s the case than by all means Brian Cushing does deserve to win the AP Rookie of the Year Award.

The reasoning is simple. If PED usage is wrong and takes away the validity of Cushing’s accomplishments, then don’t vote for him. If PED usage has no bearing on Cushing’s performance then vote for him.

This result is not a shock. We’ve seen this before. Shawne Merriman was suspended for four games for PED use, but still was voted to the Pro Bowl. Rodney Harrison was suspended for four games, but now has a spot on NBC’s Football Night in America. Despite the tests for PEDs and four-game suspensions, I think people are so smitten with the game that they don’t care.

Joachim, Cushing wasn’t held accountable, so he’s going to say whatever he wants about it, but what he took was an illegal substance and that’s why he was suspended. But like I said, most people don’t care.

Chris Losee: Not down for doping

Texan’s linebacker Brian Cushing received NFL’s Defensive Rookie of the Year Award after testing positive for hCG –a precursor for steroid use– in September of 2009. Did he deserve it? No of course not, I cannot understand how Cushing could have been considered after a second vote on the grounds of his use of a banned substance.

In some cases, professional athletes are punished after admitting or testing positive for banned substances. Cushing was punished and suspended for the first four games of the 2010 season, but myself as well as many others feel like he should not have been included in the secondary vote and that the consequences were inconsistent with the violation.

The 18 out of 50 delegates that cast their vote on Cushing’s drug induced performance acknowledged cheating and gave the impression that problems are not just with the players, but within the NFL organization itself. The true test will be Cushing’s sophomore year, and whether he can put up the same numbers to squash some of the chatter that has him under a magnifying glass going into the 2010 season.

Judge Brannen: Cushing is who we thought he was

I disagree with Joachim because Cushing said that doctors told him the only way hCG was found in his body was by injection or tumors. Cushing said he was worried he would succumb to the tumors. To his credit, he played his rookie season with reckless abandon and sacrificed his body regularly so for him to think he was at death’s doorstep is unconvincing.

Going off appearances it seems there is apathy regarding athletes who use PEDs. But I cannot co-sign Tristan’s point because 19 voters changed their vote from Cushing to either Jairus Byrd, Clay Matthews or Bryan Orkapo to spite Cushing‘s enhanced performance. Julius Peppers won the award in 2002 and it was later revealed he tested positive; the same goes for Shawne Merriman in 2005. The remaining 18 voters did not want to change the precedent.

If it is any consolation the NFL stripped Cushing of his second-team All-Pro commendation and is ineligible for the Pro Bowl yet he remains two-time 2009 Defensive Rookie of the Year.

Verdict

Chris gets the Face Time because if the NFL and the AP was serious about enforcing a zero tolerance drug policy, Cushing should not have been included in the re-vote.