Bama also suspended 3 players including a starter, but I don't think it will affect them at all:
http://www.espn.com/college-football...wn-orange-bowl
Dexter Lawrence not being available to play is a big deal. He anchors the middle of Clemson's defensive line.
Bob Green
Agreed. But after reading Dabo's comments in the article, I believe Dabo that these players probably did nothing intentionally to juice. Sounds like they did something like buy the wrong Monster drink at the 7-11. But they probably won't be able to play unless the B-sample clears them, which seems unlikely.
Vegas still has Clemson -13 FWIW
I have no clue about the B-sample likelihood of coming back negative after a positive A sample.
I interpretted the ESPN article and Mark Schlabach reporting that Clemson expects not to have these players available. But no clue what the percentage likelihood of that would be.
Maybe not relevant, but when doctors test for something like HIV, the first test is different than the second test. The first test is very sensitive, basically meaning that it probably won't miss true HIV if it's there. But the test could be a false positive.
So they get a second different test which has high "specificity." This basically means that if it says it's positive, it's almost definitely positive for true HIV. But they wouldn't do that test first because it wouldn't catch more true HIV cases because the test is not as sensitive. If someone has true HIV and gets tested, you don't want to miss it. So you first use a highly "sensitive" test for screening and then a second highly specific test for confirmation (only if the first test was positive).
Sensitivity and specificity are concepts they love to always put on doctors' and medical students' board exams.
But with this A-sample B-sample test thing for performance enhancing drugs, I have no clue if it's using the same concept. Maybe the B sample is just a separate urine sample that undergoes the same test as the A-sample? In that case, I would think it's fairly likely for the B sample to also be positive. If the B-sample test indeed undergoes a separate test with higher specificity and lower sensitivity, then there is a higher chance that test would come back negative.
That's all I know - I really know nothing about the B-sample test in this case.
Last edited by richardjackson199; 12-25-2018 at 09:15 AM.
Maybe Clemson should have a buncha non-athletes submit urine for testing, that way, if some other regular students test positive...
Nah, never mind. Nothing like that would *ever* work.
[redacted] them and the horses they rode in on.
It must be tough for Carolina fans to have their school brought up in conversation whenever there is talk of cheating.
With that thought, Merry Christmas to all and a happy 9f.
Alberto Contador blamed meat for his bad dope result in the TdF a few years ago. So maybe it was just hormones in the cattle from which their steaks came.
Not having Dexter on that d-line is a big deal for Clemson. When Dabo called him to tell him, Dexter thought coach was pulling his leg. He was surprised when coach told him he wasn't kidding.
My son played against Dexter Lawrence in high school.
I don’t know him, I’ll just say I am disappointed in that it has been fun for me to see kids my son played with and against as DI players.
Being on the outside, its hard to know what the truth is beyond the facts of two failed drug tests.