Author: Anthony Stalter (Page 349 of 1503)

“Rocket” once again denies taking HGH or steroids, lying to Congress

Former New York Yankee Major League Baseball pitcher Roger Clemens is flanked by his lawyers while testifying before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing on The Mitchell Report: The Illegal Use of Steroids in Major League Baseball, on Capitol Hill in Washington in this February 13, 2008 file photograph. Clemens, one of the best pitchers in the sport's history, has been indicted on a series of charges related to lying to the U.S. Congress during an investigation into doping, court papers said. Picture taken February 13, 2008.  REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst/Files  (UNITED STATES - Tags: POLITICS SPORT BASEBALL CRIME LAW)

After he was indicted yesterday on charges of making false statements to Congress during his testimony about his use of performance-enhancing drugs, Roger Clemens made a statement via his Twitter page denying that he ever used steroids.

I never took HGH or Steroids. And I did not lie to Congress. I look forward to challenging the Governments accusations, and hope people will keep an open mind until trial. I appreciate all the support I have been getting. I am happy to finally have my day in court.

Rocket

Is it just me, or does anyone else think there’s something sad about the way Clemens signs off as “Rocket” at the end of his note? That’s his nickname of course, but it almost feels like he’s trying to play to the crowd that beloved him during his playing days.

Regardless, if you’re innocent, you shout it from the rooftops as much as possible – just like Clemens has done. It’s also important to keep in mind that he has never been proven guilty of anything as of this point.

But given how much evidence there is linking him to performance-enhancing drugs, I can’t help but to think about the Dana Carevy stand-up routine when he pokes fun at the O.J. Simpson trial.

Here sits a mountain of forensic evidence and Roger’s like, “Why we even havin’ a trial?”

More trouble for South Carolina players?

TUSCALOOSA - OCTOBER 17:  Head coach Steve Spurrier of the South Carolina Gamecocks watches the scoreboard during the game against the Alabama Crimson Tide at Bryant-Denny Stadium on October 17, 2009 in Tuscaloosa, Alabama.  The Crimson Tide beat the Gamecocks 20-6.  (Photo by Mike Zarrilli/Getty Images)

The NCAA is already looking into the trip tight end Weslye Saunders took this past spring to Miami and whether or not it was agent-funded, now it appears that more South Carolina players could be in trouble.

ESPN.com reports that several South Carolina players, including Saunders, were asked by school officials to move out of a Columbia hotel Thursday evening. The NCAA is now investigating if the players were in violation of any rules by staying at the hotel.

Last week, the NCAA interviewed a number of players about their occupation of the Whitney Hotel, where South Carolina coach Steve Spurrier and other coaches have stayed in the past, The State (Columbia, S.C.) newspaper reported.

Spurrier said Thursday the players have been asked by the school to move out of the hotel, settle their bills and stay elsewhere.

“There’s been some issues,” Spurrier said on his radio call-in show. “We’ve encouraged our guys to move out of the Whitney, to pay their monthly bill and move out . . . Whatever their arrangements were, they need to pay up and move out.”

Spurrier said he knew there were players staying at the Whitney, but did not know of the details, The State reported.

Along with Saunders, the other players who have been linked to the hotel stay are defensive tackle Travian Robertson, defensive tackle Ladi Ajiboye, safety Akeem Auguste and offensive tackle Jarriel King. If the players were staying there on their own dime, there shouldn’t an issue. But if a player agent was picking up the tab, obviously this could become a distraction for Spurrier and the Gamecock program.

Either way, it’s not good that Saunders is being investigated for two different incidents. Just because he’s being investigated doesn’t mean he’s done anything wrong, but this isn’t a good situation regardless.

Should the Colts be concerned about their defensive tackles?

HOUSTON - NOVEMBER 29: Defensive lineman Daniel Muir #90 of the Indianapolis Colts on the bench in the game against the Houston Texans on November 29, 2009 at Reliant Stadium in Houston, Texas. The Colts won 35-27. (Photo by Stephen Dunn/Getty Images)

Merry training camp season, everyone. It’s been a long offseason, but football is finally gearing up again and to celebrate I’m rolling out a new series on TSR entitled “2010 NFL Question Marks,” where I discuss one or two of the biggest concerns that teams have heading into the new season. Granted, some teams have more issues than others, but I’ll primarily be focusing on the biggest problem areas. Today I’ll be discussing the Colts and their potential issues at defensive tackle.

Same story, different year for the Colts.

Until Peyton Manning has to enlist the aid of walker to get onto the field on Sundays, the Colts will compete for a playoff berth every season. Their strength is their dynamic offense and the speed of their defense, but even a team with as many division titles as Indy has over the last decade has at least one weakness.

It’s seems like every year we’re talking about the Colts’ issues at the defensive tackle position. That’s because the team refuses to upgrade those spots and they decided to ignore the positions once again this offseason.

The projected starters this year are Daniel Muir and Antonio Johnson. On most teams, the duo would be fringe starters or excellent backups. On the Colts, they’re counted on to anchor a defense that primarily relies on speed and the pass-rush that Dwight Freeney and Robert Mathis generate from their end positions.

The 25-year-old Johnson was a restricted free agent this past offseason and was brought back on a one-year, $1.684 million salary. He’s athletic for being 6’3 and 310 pounds, but he can be pushed backwards at the point of attack and he’s not consistent against the run.

Continue reading »

Extending Orton’s contract a good move by Broncos for Tebow

Aug 07, 2010 - Denver, Colorado, USA - Denver Broncos QB TIM TEBOW sported a new hair cut as part of the Broncos Rookie Hazing tradition before practice at Training Camp.

The Broncos did the best thing for Tim Tebow’s development yesterday when they signed Kyle Orton to a one-year, $9 million contract extension through the 2011 season.

Orton has proved this summer that he’s light years ahead of both Tebow and Brady Quinn (who is freefalling down the Broncos’ depth chart) in his understanding of Josh McDaniels’ offense. (And why wouldn’t he be? He already has a year in the system.) He gives the Broncos their best chance of winning now and the contract is a reward for his hard work this offseason.

The extension also takes some of the pressure off of Tebow, who is going to need time to develop. Regardless of whether or not you think he’s going to be great or the second coming of Drew Henson, all young quarterbacks need time to learn. Considering he didn’t run a pro style offense at Florida and is still working out the kinks in his throwing motion, Tebow is going to need even more time before he’s ready to start.

By signing Orton the Broncos are basically saying that he’s their starter and that Tebow can take his time. I know many people can’t wait to see the Tebow era take flight in Denver, but putting too much pressure on a young quarterback too early can be death. He already has enough on his shoulders by being a first round pick – why add to it?

McDaniels will surely put together some packages to feature Tebow’s strength as a runner, but as long as Orton is healthy and productive then he’s going to be the starter. Tebow’s time will come – it just won’t be any time soon.

WAC seeking $5 million buyout penalties from Fresno State & Nevada

PASADENA, CA - SEPTEMBER 27:  Damion Owens #4 of the Frenso State Bulldogs celebrates the Bulldogs win over the UCLA Bruins during the game on September 27, 2008 at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, California.  (Photo by Stephen Dunn/Getty Images)

According to a report by ESPN.com, WAC commissioner Karl Benson believes that Fresno State and Nevada – two schools leaving the conference for the Mountain West – owe the WAC $5 million in buyout penalties.

Karl Benson says the Bulldogs and Wolf Pack are going to have to pay up on a departure fee and possibly stay in the WAC until 2012 because they didn’t meet a deadline to get out of the league earlier.

Benson believes both schools owe $5 million buyout penalties, whether the agreements were signed or orally agreed upon.

And don’t expect any favors.

Benson says Fresno State and Nevada acted selfishly when they accepted invitations to join the Mountain West. That basically dissolved an agreement the WAC had to bring BYU back to the league in every sport but football.

Is it just me or does Benson come off resembling a salty ex trying to get back at his former lover? If the two schools owe the WAC $5 million, then so be it. But don’t make this personal by saying Fresno State and Nevada acted selfishly when all of college football acts selfishly all the time.

The goal for any program is to gain as much exposure and make as much money as they possibly can. Therefore, there shouldn’t be any surprise when it comes to why a program jumps conferences.

« Older posts Newer posts »