Some did, but Cushing is still the DRotY. Maybe the best move would have been just to strip Cushing of the award and just leave it vacant for 2009. Instead it looks like they are sending a damning message to young players who are tempted to use something that will enhance their performance (and is banned). While this failed test may not be an actual steroid, rumors continue to circulate about how this substance is used in conjunction with steroids.
(Ed. Note: The linked article describes hCG and why some steroid users have used it in the past to stimulate testosterone. That said, currently there is no proof that Cushing was doing this; also Brian Cushing denies that he ever took a banned substance to cause the positive hCG test- just making it clear that IIWII is not making that allegation or suggesting any steroid use in this posting about Brian Cushing).
And please journalists, don't give me the bull**** excuse of "we voted against the system and not for Cushing". Your comments make no sense in the PFT article. Here's a few:
"If I had known in January when we initially voted that Brian Cushing had tested positive for a banned substance, I might not have voted for him." "However, Cushing won the award in January, and I don't feel like we should revise history. I am concerned about the precedent."So you guys are writers and journalists, correct? You're the guys that come up with the scoops and know the inside stuff and you mean to tell me that nobody in the press corp knew about the positive test back when it happened? And how is history being revised if the positive test occurred during the 2009 season? If this happened now or at any point in Cushing's career after the 2009 season, then I'd agree with you, but that's not the case. The positive test occurred early in the 2009 season. Thus, it should at least be factored in the voting if not disqualifying the player from the award.
And this comment by Tom Curran:
"The AP didn't mess up. Cushing did," Curran said. "He won't get much enjoyment from looking up at his mantle and seeing the trophy commemorating his season. It will mock him. But the AP didn't have to make a mockery of its awards process by giving everyone a mulligan."
So you mean to tell me that when olympians are stripped of medals because they tested positive for a banned substance or failing to comply to some rule that those who now get the medals for following the rules are given a mulligan? Same goes for the NCAA teams stripped of titles and/or wins b/c of violations. I'm not even going to get into the discussions on Clemens and Bonds and how many have been clamoring for the dreaded asterisk on their records or keeping them out of the Baseball Hall of Fame (and if memory serves neither ever tested positive for a banned substance). Jeez, now I'm defending Bonds and Clemens. Shame on you AP.
It's a bad message to send. Hey kids, don't use banned substances; but if you do test positive for one just make sure you win your awards first and you then get to keep them. That's okay.
Just in case you're curious to see who voted for whom, here's the list per Yahoo! Sports. Yeah, I don't understand why some people on that list are allowed to vote either.