At risk of beating a very dead horse, the thread opened with the claim that "Cutler admitted steroid use." Chick responded that in fact he did not "say" he used steroids. I agree. However, although he didn't "say" he used steroids, it is very easy to extrapolate as much. If A=B (Cutler is part of the group) and B=C (the group uses steroids), then A=C. Now Chick is right, Cutler didn't say A=C. He left that for us to say. We are able to extrapolate it. So technically we are saying it. I believe this is what's causing the confusion: If he outlined the parts of the argument but never made the conclusion and left it for us to "say" the conclusion... Did he say it? If he said everything except for the conclusion is he in reality saying the conclusion? Most everyone is saying yes, since he basically set it up. Chick is saying on a sterile and technical and legal level, he didn't say "It". (which is true). Cutler seems to be suggesting it, but he didn't "Say it".