BroDeal said:
It does not matter. Armstrong has appearance on his side. The patty cake sanctions given to the others make his sanction look wildly disproportionate. Honestly, as much as I like seeing Armstrong get pounded, it is disproportionate.
As I said, eventually he will get eight years. It might even be less if what we all suspect turns out to be true, that the affidavits leave out a lot of truth. What happens when information emerges that shows the others doped before they were hired by Postal, they doped after they supposedly stopped, and they actively sought out dope rather than having it forced on them? Riders like Danielson and Hesjedal were hardcore dopers before they turned to racing on the road. It is hard to paint them as victims.
To the bolded: Really BroDeal? I don't see how you can say that. You've been here the whole time, you know all the nastly dirty underhanded things Lance did to fight this.
All the other cyclists took drugs, then cooperated. 6 months to a year is reasonable given their cooperation.
Lance on the other hand, took drugs, transported drugs, coerced others to take drugs, made fraudulent contracts, launched fraudulent lawsuits, profited through his charity from what people thought was money going to cancer.
And then, on top of all that, where others cooperated, he attempted to destroy. Multiple lawsuits, had Livestrong lobbyists try to shut down USADA permanently, sought to bribe USADA so he'd have an edge on them, most likely incited the UCI's pathetic attempts to shut it down, and on and on and on.
How can you say their penalties are disproportionate? I would say they are exactly proportionate. Lance did a whole hell of a lot more in the furtherance of cheating in sports than all the other cyclists who testified in this case did combined, and that's including the firestorms that Hamilton and Flandis ignited to try and burn down the USADA.