Bonds is the steroid scapegoat

by jds2 on Aug 8, 2007 8:27 AM CDT Comment 60 comments

I personally beleive the owners probably knew that Performance Enhancing drugs were being used as early as the mid 90's...But they turned a blind eye to it because MLB was in the process of recovering from the strike and the canceled world series. The Sosa/McGuire Chase of '98, at the time, was credited with saving the game after the strike and also ushered in an era of increased offense as well as ticket sales now called the "steroid era".
Now the owners are throwing bonds under the bus so they can act tough on steroid after letting it go for the better part of a decade. However, the owners did not initiate the drug testing program currently in place it was congress. If not for congress the owners probably would still be ignoring the large steriod using elephant in the room.

Let me ask you this if a bunch of truck drivers were on amphetamines so they can drive longer hours and the head of the trucking company knew about it and did nothing wouldn't he be considered just as guilty. I'm not saying bud or any other owners knew steroids were going on, but it seems like they tried very hard to not know it was going on so they could have denyability later.

Baseball players who cheated and took steroids should be punished severely, but let's not overlook who made the most money from the steroid era, the owners. Shouldn't they be punished as well?

Go Cubs

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

0 recs | Comment 60 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Yes, yes, yes, yes

a thousand times yes. Barry and the players have borne the brunt of the steroid drama, but the owners who played "See No Evil, Hear No Evil" while they lined their pockets are just as much to blame, IMO. Thanks for posting this.

"One thing you learn as a Cubs fan: When you bought your ticket, you could bank on seeing the bottom of the ninth." - Joe Garagiola

by gary varsho on Aug 8, 2007 8:36 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

AGREED!

MLB & all players who decide to illegally enhance their performance belong together in their exclusive Hall of Shame!

Greed-motivated behavior and collusion dominated the power mongers of MLB after suffering from the strike of 1994, and the resulting diminishing revenues. MLB powers-that-be should be forever ashamed for not coming clean with the public, the fans who ultimately "pay the bills". I have no reason to believe that this prevailing attitude and single-minded mode of operating has changed, or will ever change, until the people who are responsible for this disgraceful cover-up come clean!

Baseball is a great game. I prefer to watch and support as pure a competition as possible. I understand that "greenies", alchohol, etc., have been and continue to be used. MLB needs to genuinely dedicate their operations to rid the game of diminishing and destructive practices on the part of both greedy owner's and player's behavior.

Until that time, all records will continue to be suspect and tarnished. I propose to "close" the record books, until the operators of the game are forthcoming, and rededicate all MLB operations to practicing and promoting fair and honest competition.

No asterisks, just a "closed" book, until a clean field of competition evolves.

SOMEDAY…

"If they won a world championship, sure, we'd be proud. But we couldn't love them any more than we already do " -anonymous Cub fan

by hellfreezesoverwaittillnextyear on Aug 8, 2007 9:03 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Absolutely true...

but this doesn't lessen the players culpability one bit. Plenty of blame to go around.

BIALIS!!!

by Modern Relic on Aug 8, 2007 9:13 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

No doubt

The owners bear as much responsibility as the players. They are hand in hand with the mess that was made.

It's funny that in all the ceremony that has surrounded this event for the past week or so, the only person who looked like a complete and total tool was Bud Selig.

Aaron was gracious, Bonds handled it well, but in all the anticipation and planning that went into the moment ... that was the best that Selig could come up with. I've never been a Selig basher. There are some real positives on his resume, but the he way he handled this whole thing was an embarassment.

by NO100 on Aug 8, 2007 9:28 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Ned Yost agrees with me...

when he said referring to Barry Bonds' record breaking, "I really don't care."

I love that bit of honesty, although he was probably caught off guard considering he has other things to worry about.

"I never take a game home with me. I leave it in some bar along the way." -Bob Lemon, from Sweet Lou

by section229beer on Aug 8, 2007 6:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Bravo!

Time to put the blame where it really belongs: Bud Selig and His Cronies.

Besides the obvious - Go Irish.

Z. He doesn't need an exclamtion point. He is one.

by PopeFlick on Aug 8, 2007 9:43 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

The Great Giants 1st Baseman & HR King:

http://www.baseballlibrary.com/baseballlibrary/ballplayers/O/Oh_Sadaharu.stm

868 still rules!

As well as 962! :

http://library.thinkquest.org/3427/data/gibson.htm

And yet the hypocritical MLB continues to promote approaching an international game and market to further solidify their geed-mongering motivation, while referring to the "all-time HR" mark!

868 & 962 still rule!

SOMEDAY…

"If they won a world championship, sure, we'd be proud. But we couldn't love them any more than we already do " -anonymous Cub fan

by hellfreezesoverwaittillnextyear on Aug 8, 2007 9:45 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Not against MLB pitching.

comon. none of those records are against major league pitching. If bonds played his whole career in japan he would have more than 756. I'm not a fan of bonds, but i think it's a vaild point. He also hit alot of his 756 in SF... not exactly a hitters ballpark.

by OCcubsnation on Aug 8, 2007 1:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Excellent Diarie

and couldn't agree more that the owners played naive to this whole thing for a long time. They helped to allow a monster to develop, and now they have to deal with the fallout. Some will blame the union for being difficult to work with, but the owners could have forced the issue, because they had public opinion on their side.

Now, you still have the issue of HGH, and I'll guarantee, you have a lot of dudes that are using that today.

"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel

by MPH73 on Aug 8, 2007 9:49 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree

The primary responsibility for the whole mess lies with Bud and MLB. Bonds and the players just did what they were able to get away with to increase their fame and fortune. I'm more sad today than angry that baseball's most cherished records were demolished by chemically enhanced players.

What does irk me are the people that claim that Bonds never tested positive and therefore he's innocent. People are sentenced to death on circumstantial evidence. The evidence against Bonds is overwhelming. He did steroids, no if's.

by rlpete on Aug 8, 2007 10:19 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Bonds is hated

because 1) he's a jerk (although often a charming one), and 2) he's a black jerk. Whether he took steriods or not, no one since Ted Williams (and probably not even Williams) has commanded the strike zone like Bonds. Steroids don't do that for you. Bonds has been a much more feared hitter than either Aaron or Williams, and they've even pitched around him more than they did the Babe.

Of course, the owners are complicit in the steroid era. But that's nothing new. They've turned a blind eye to greenies (amphetimenes) since the 1960s (read Ball Four), at least until Neifi Perez. As for HGH, no doubt a lot of guys take it, but it doesn't build muscle mass; it might make you look and feel younger--and help you work out longer and harder--but it's not a magic chemical that will produce great baseball players.

By the way, my guess is that we'll never really get beyond guys using drugs. There will always be masking agents and drugs you can't test for. And it's not principally a baseball problem--no doubt there's more football players taking drugs, especially linemen. And of course look at bicycling.

Guys are going to do whatever they think will make them better players--whether its new weight training, dieting, or taking drugs. I'm not saying there shouldn't be tests for drugs for those that can be tested, only that we should be realistic about what can be done and not be so outraged at guys like Bonds. Pete Rose and gamblers like that NBA referee are a lot bigger threat to the integrity of sport than guys like Bonds or Lance Armstrong.

by bleacher on Aug 8, 2007 10:19 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Do you really think...

... it's because he's black? If he were white, and had the same personality and steroid accusations, I think people would be just as upset about this whole thing.

This is one time where I think race has nothing to do with it.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Aug 8, 2007 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed...

...If Mark McGwire was still playing and it was he who just broke the record, I'm sure there would be some outrage. However, the outrage might not be as bad because McGwire is nowhere near the jerk that Bonds is. Race has absolutely nothing to do with this.

by 60613 on Aug 8, 2007 10:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I really don't want to open up...

...this entire kettle of fish. But certainly African-Americans feel that it's partly because he's black. And I think it's a little foolhardy to claim that baseball has fully overcame its racist past. [There is, of course, some great good that baseball has done in the service of race relations in this country. But it's hardly the whole picture.]

So I don't think it's the whole picture, but it's not something I feel entirely comfortable dismissing out of hand -- if nothing else, being so dismissive can come across as patronizing to those who feel genuine concern about the issue.

FREE CARMEN PIGNATIELLO!

by cwyers on Aug 8, 2007 10:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe this is unique to baseball...

...but let's look to the man who's arguably the most revered sports figure in Chicago: Walter Payton. Race never came into the picture as far as I can remember when he broke the all-time rushing record in the 80s. But he was a great human being, well-liked and respected by all walks of life. And his records were achieved as a result of hard work and dedication. Bonds has very few of these traits, except perhaps a good work ethic, and I fell ill even comparing the two men.

by 60613 on Aug 8, 2007 11:06 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Remember

Remember Jesse and others saying the Bears didn't extend Briggs because of race?

And the national press saying Chicago only loves Urlacher because he's white?

Or Mariotti saying the Cubs would never hire Baker because he's black (despite the fact that the previous manager before the temporary one was too)

I just want the Cubs to top the Bears NFC Title Game as my highlight of the year.

by cubstoseriesby100 on Aug 8, 2007 3:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Apples and Oranges

Your paraphrased quotes only show that there are others out there that believe in similar conspiracy theories. Mere accusations are being made by these people. Same as the others in this thread. The fact that you're grouping them with Jay Mariotti speaks volumes more than I can.

After reading this article on ESPN, I can see why some people may have these perceptions. Not that I agree with them, but I can see how they arrived at those conclusions.

by 60613 on Aug 8, 2007 4:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

All of the above and the Bonds things

Is pure stupidity calling any situation a race situation those I listed or the Bonds thing and that is my point.

Baseless accusations make real ones harder to prove.

We're seeing this in the Presidential Race by Obama people saying the only reason people don't support him is they are racist. Nothing about his policies or any other reason.

I just want the Cubs to top the Bears NFC Title Game as my highlight of the year.

by cubstoseriesby100 on Aug 9, 2007 10:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

For the record

I volunteered and voted for Obama in 04 for Senate. I just don't think he's the best candidate for President.

I just want the Cubs to top the Bears NFC Title Game as my highlight of the year.

by cubstoseriesby100 on Aug 9, 2007 10:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I do

I think it is a factor. Bonds, as an African-American jerk, is held to a different standard than your average white jerk. The venon spewing in his direction isn't all about steroids. Do you really think this country has transformed itself since 1974 on race? It's better now, I agree, but come on. If you think race isn't a factor, your being naive.

by bleacher on Aug 8, 2007 11:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Naivity has nothing to do with it

Where's your proof? Everything that I find wrong about Bonds has nothing to do with his skin color, absolutely nothing. And it isn't as if he's the first black jerk in sports, either. Jackie Robinson wasn't exactly a pleasant guy on or off the field, and it goes from there. From Jim Brown to Terrell Owens to Bill Russell to Kobe Bryant, all of whom were or have been borne out to be jerks all by sheer force of their personalities, not skin color.

And whose record are we all upset Bonds is "breaking*"?? A black man, Henry Aaron, who, over time, has proven himself to be the anti-jerk, or in other words, a class individual. Moreover, for his entire adult life, Babe Ruth was accused of being part black, and he was celebrated as a character, not a jerk.

So unless you've got some proof on this one, whereby someone has expressly slammed Bonds because of his race, keep your charge to yourself.

Santo Forever!

by BeerCub on Aug 8, 2007 12:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Bullshit

Sorry to curse, but to say that unless "someone has expressly slammed Bonds because of his race" then someone who believes that race has played a factor in the media and/or public opinion of Bonds must shut up is absolute nonsense.

Race is a factor that permeates all of American society. While there's no question that progress has been made in that regard, the idea that because there aren't people publicly hurling racial slurs at Bonds means that race is not a factor in the level of hostility so many (almost exclusively white) commentators direct toward Bonds is not just naive, it is willful ignorance.

As far as I know, every single serious study of the treatment of blacks and whites continues to show that blacks are treated worse. This includes studies where fake resumes are sent to employers where the only difference between the candidates is that one has a racially identifiable name. Guess what happens - those with "black names" have far fewer offers. There is no study that I'm aware of showing that black drivers are more likely to violate traffic laws, yet study after study shows that cops give blacks more traffic tickets than they give whites. Study after study of banks shows the same thing - blacks with equivalent financial information as whites are charged higher interest rates and loan fees.

The list could go on, but because racial slurs aren't generally used, I suppose it would make no difference to people like BeerCub.

The issue gets even more complicated when racial categorizations other than black and white are involved, but I'll save those discussions for other blogs.

The bottom line is that race is everpresent in this country. Is Bonds an ass? Possibly. He's certainly been portrayed that way by the media he openly disdains. Does his personality justify the way so many people vilify him? In my opinion, absolutely not.

by Porfi on Aug 8, 2007 12:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Unbelievable....

None of what you just spewed has any relevancy to the Bonds situation. None. He is vilified PRECISELY because he is a jerk and and for his use of steroids. So is McGwire to a degree, especially since his Congressional meltdown. Note that McGwire's as white as they come.

You can cite all the studies and stats about society that you wish. I'm not about to take issue with their validity, hell, I work in the criminal justice system. But since we're talking about Bonds here, and not about getting pulled over for driving while black in Beverly Hills, cite me to something that says Bonds has the rep he does because he's black AND a cheater.

Santo Forever!

by BeerCub on Aug 8, 2007 1:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

You just don't get it

You are asking for the impossible: "cite me to something that says Bonds has the rep he does because he's black AND a cheater." Really, who would say something like that in this day and age?

That's a large part of my point - American society has largely moved past the point where someone is going to come out and say "I that that n*** Barry Bonds." Just like most bank officers aren't likely to say they're going to charge higher loan fees because the customer is black. But just like banks do charge black customers higher loan fees, many white people do dislike Bonds more because he's black.

Unlike the case with banks, it's impossible to do a blind qualitative study. But that does not mean that it's not true. You are free to disagree with the original poster who said it's naive to think race isn't an issue. But saying he/she cannot speak without proof that can't reasonably be expected to exist is absurd.

by Porfi on Aug 8, 2007 1:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

OK...

...If race is such a problem in sports, why didn't Walter Payton get similarly vilified? (A) There wasn't a steroid controversy surrounding him, (B) he wasn't a jerk, and (C) we didn't have 24-hr cable networks following his every action and trying to convince you that you should care. If race is always an inescapable factor, as you contend, it would have shown itself in then, and also when Emmitt Smith broke the record. What you're suggesting is simply opinion, and you're right -- it's probably unprovable. I've personally seen no evidence of racism in the major sports media in regard to covering this event, though I may have missed something. Ironically, and sadly, the only injection of racism I've seen has come from those who purport to work towards it's end.

by 60613 on Aug 8, 2007 2:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ah, the Walter Peyton defense.

If the NFL is so modernized and past racial issues altogether, then answer this question: why is it that as you look at the NFL, the higher paid skill positions seem to have a higher percentage of white players than then lower-paid positions?

Look, racism in sports isn't the only thing, but to just sweep in under the rug altogether isn't entirely productive either.

FREE CARMEN PIGNATIELLO!

by cwyers on Aug 8, 2007 2:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

No one is saying that.....

...but where is it the cause of Bonds' problems now? I'll grant you, Aaron caught all sorts of racist crap when he broke Ruth's record, but here?

And I'll raise McGwire's name again here. The guy has run and hid, but after his pitiful performance before Congress, wouldn't you say he's now slotted in the same general category as Bonds as it relates to cheating?

Santo Forever!

by BeerCub on Aug 8, 2007 2:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's not even close

No one is hated on anywhere near the level Bonds is. McGwire broke a revered record as well, and he does not get the same criticism as Bonds.

by Aaron on Aug 8, 2007 4:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Gee

maybe because Mac isn't as big of a F___in ASSHOLE as Bonds is.

Bonds could be the biggest asswipe in baseball history, at least a runner up.

Don't get me wrong though, Mac is a cheat too, white or not, I do not respect him. I do respect his ability NOT to be a total shitbag to everyone and everything however.

MMMMM...Hebrew National

by Kinky Reggae on Aug 8, 2007 6:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

So what?

So because someone is an asshole they should be held to a higher level of scrutiny regarding steroids? If you think they both did roids they should be treated equally, their personalities should have nothing to do with it.

It makes no sense for people to say: Player X and Player Y both used steroids, but it's worse for Player X because he's not very nice. That is why people pull out the race card, because basing the extra level of scrutiny applied to Bonds on his personality makes no sense.

by Aaron on Aug 8, 2007 9:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

When

did I say Bonds is MORE of a cheater that Mac?

I have consistently said that they are BOTH cheaters and both get no respect for me. When it comes to the type of people they are and have been, Bonds gets less respect from me...period.

Is that really so complicated?

One is black and one is white, I do not ccare, they both cheated. One happens to have recently broken what i hold to be a legitimate and clean record so as far as that is concerned, I give Bonnds little credit. But NOT because he is black. If it were Mac, and not Bonds, I would have the same thing to say.

MMMMM...Hebrew National

by Kinky Reggae on Aug 9, 2007 8:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Which is why I said....

....same general category.

Santo Forever!

by BeerCub on Aug 8, 2007 9:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Seems to?

Show me some data to back up your assertions. While you're doing that, I'll make my own: the majority of skill players in the NFL are African American. Skill players get paid the most. Salary arbitrators are in place to ensure factors like race aren't included in NFL contracts, as they do in other sports. Arbitration is in place to ensure that pay is performance-based. If a player chooses to accept lower pay to play in a specific town, then that's up to the player. Of course, there are many other factors that determine pay in the NFL. Should I go for guaranteed years and lower per-year salary, or should I go for the big money for fewer years?

If what you're suggesting were reality, there would be a boatload of civil rights lawsuits coming to NFL ownership. We would have already seen them by now. Of course, you'll probably come up with some sort of cockamamie conspiracy theory to counter that. Just remember this before you let your imagination run wild: there's no antitrust exemption in the NFL.

Also, the issue here isn't salary. It's Bonds' "vilification." Bonds is vilified because of his actions, not his ethnic background, and your opinions won't change that. The Walter Payton "defense" as you call it is a better parallel. But it's hardly a "defense" when there's nothing I've done that needs defending. Unless, that is, you're accusing me of something. In that case, please provide evidence...

by 60613 on Aug 8, 2007 2:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I get it just fine.....

....but I live in a world where you need some proof to make an accusation. I'm not denying any of the other things you mention as it relates to blacks in society. But here, one can't just make a passing comment that much of the negativity surrounding Bonds is because he's black, especially with the absolute mountain of evidence available to use instead. So yes, the poster can speak freely on it all he/she wants, but just the same, be prepared to be called on it. Bonds' situation is too high profile and has so much information out there that making such a call when none of this available information suggests a race issue is, well, also absurd.

Santo Forever!

by BeerCub on Aug 8, 2007 2:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Think there's any correlation

between those who are offended by any suggestion that there might be racism in sports and those who spew the venon against Bonds? In each case, there's a lot of apparent emotion.

by bleacher on Aug 8, 2007 3:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Race

I'm not going to say that the entire, or even the major reason, that people hate Barry Bonds is based on race, but I know it plays a factor. I have a set of somewhat less-enlightened friends from what would be considered redneck country here in So. Cal. They and many of the people from their circle talk about Bonds in extremely racist terms, and I guarantee you they haven't been nearly as venomous about a white star like Giambi. They're more open to accepting a friendly black personality like Tony Gwynn, but they can't stand the guys they perceive to be surly and too black, like Bonds and Sheffield.

I really hope this issue can go away for a while now; Bonds owns the record, period. I just consider it apples and oranges. Aaron accomplished his record throughout a so-called pitcher's era, he had to overcome serious racism and moved from Milwaukee to Atlanta during one of the toughest periods of racial strife of the 20th century, and he lost several years by playing in the Negro Leagues. Bonds is still the greatest power hitter I've seen in this generation, and I'll celebrate him as such; my kids will learn that after the 80s, baseball became a BIG money game for the players, and the urge to be the greatest player in a juiced era caused some to lose their moral center. Nobody gets a free pass from me, not Ripken, Gwynn, Sosa, Clemens, Bonds, nobody. I consider them all a part of a different baseball era, like the deadball era or the 19th century game. I will always love baseball, though; I can accept that it's not exactly the game I grew up loving unconditionally, but for me, that changed in 1981 anyway (when Bowie Kuhn conspired to give his friends the O'Malley's a chance to win the World Series by creating the split season).

"Something has to give and since there aren't 8 or 9 pitchers sitting around on the trade market, I think it has to be El Suckerpuncho." - TMOX, 6/14/07

by TMOX on Aug 8, 2007 4:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The race card

When people play the race card to excuse someone's actions so they call criticizing it racist they really make real racism harder to prove.

Kind of similar to people saying Prior is on steroids. When you make baseless accusations it makes real situations harder to prove.

How about how Sosa was treated very well before the corked bat even with the allegations? He was good to the media so he was treated nicely.

And last time I checked Sosa isn't white.

I just want the Cubs to top the Bears NFC Title Game as my highlight of the year.

by cubstoseriesby100 on Aug 9, 2007 10:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree Bonds was a great player before

he may have taken any form of illegal performance enhancing drugs.

With that said, when you add strength (bat speed, reaction time) to any hitter, they can develop a better command of the strike zone. The reason is very simple, if they are quicker, they learn to wait a tad longer before they commit to their swing, and are able to lay off of pitches they may have swung at before.

Take a look at Sosa, he was known as a guy that would chase pitches all over the place early in his career. During his home run years, he became more selective and his average went up quite a bit.

Giving a hitter a split second longer to commit to a swing, is the most powerful tool they could ever have.

"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel

by MPH73 on Aug 8, 2007 10:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I remember...

Bonds' first 2002 at bat in Wrigley Field after breaking McGuire's similarly tainted record:

Barroid was booed heartily when he was announced. Those boos quickly turned to cheers, however, when Mark Prior's first pitch hit him in the shoulder.

I miss Mark Prior.

by section229beer on Aug 8, 2007 10:22 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

and Prior was probably taking HGH at the time.

by bleacher on Aug 8, 2007 10:28 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

HGH?

If you're allegations have any credibility, I guess HGH cannot be considered a performance enhancer. If he were on such substances, he may have been a more durable pitcher and not so injury-prone -- not that I condone such cheating...

by 60613 on Aug 8, 2007 10:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

What?

PEDS = injury free.

That is silly.

visit the mindful mission.

by big_lowitzki on Aug 8, 2007 12:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not necessarily injury free...

...but I have seen it stated that steroids allow you to return from injuries much faster than you normally would. But to the parent's credit, I've also read that any benefit you get muscularly (if that's a word) comes at the expense of your ligaments. I can't recall the specifics of Priors injuries, but I guess we can't rule PEDs out. Consider my reply retracted.

by 60613 on Aug 8, 2007 2:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Has there ever?

Has there ever been anybody with any credibility saying Prior did anything?

I have never seen anything just baseless speculation.

Especially after he lost MPH off the fastball this spring training. Of course the accusers never apologized when we found out his shoulder was made of potato salad.

I just want the Cubs to top the Bears NFC Title Game as my highlight of the year.

by cubstoseriesby100 on Aug 8, 2007 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I was joking (sort of)

But if he was on HGH, it wouldn't immunize him from injury. In fact, it might make injuries more likely, as guys think they can they can do more than they actually can without hurting themselves. I don't think that's why Prior got hurt; that was more about mechanics. The guy who everyone thought had perfect mechanics actually had a very flawed delivery. His elbow was too high, put too much pressure on his shoulder.

HGH isn't like steroids. It's not at all clear that it would enhance performance, although it would allow you to work out harder.

by bleacher on Aug 8, 2007 11:11 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Can we crown him

the steroid king instead of HR king?

MMMMM...Hebrew National

by Kinky Reggae on Aug 8, 2007 12:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

wow

That's brilliant, did you stay up all night thinking of that one.

by Aaron on Aug 8, 2007 2:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Actually no...

just thought it up on the spot. Pretty good huh?

As for all the crap about it being a race thing, LOAD OF CRAP! What a surprise though that people are trying this argument now.

MMMMM...Hebrew National

by Kinky Reggae on Aug 8, 2007 4:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

its ironic

i was reading this article about the armour that he wears on his right arm and the focus was that by its design it aids to being able to provide a constant swing plan by how it locks the arm. This results in a more consistant swing with more power and is one reason why they speculate he does not do well in derby contests.

They go on to say that he can wear the armour, although it is now ILLEGAL, because he had it prior to the rule so its grandfathered in.

Now to the point, using this logic, if Barry or anyone makes comes out with the agrument that Performance enhancing drugs were not illegal in terms of Baseball rules but it is now, it should not matter because we used them prior to the ruling or the testing so therefore we are grandfathered in.

I would like to see him have to hit without that thing, the article claimed that it could have added up to 100 hrs.

by cubsfaninkc on Aug 8, 2007 12:59 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

heres the link

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003621797

by cubsfaninkc on Aug 8, 2007 1:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Garbage

This pseudo-scientific piece of "journalism" didn't pass my smell test, and it's already been completely discredited by the creator of the brace.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/radio/audio/bpr_070807_1.mp3

What makes anyone think this guy is qualified to make these arguments?

His follow-up article is even worse:

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003623041

He abandons most of his original arguments in favor of some even more specious ones.

by Aaron on Aug 8, 2007 4:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Don't forget the union

Who thretened to strike if they imposed steroid rules.

I just want the Cubs to top the Bears NFC Title Game as my highlight of the year.

by cubstoseriesby100 on Aug 8, 2007 1:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Aaron

First let me state I think he was as clean as clean can be.

But how do we know he and some of the others weren't getting extra help back then?

And why aren't there asterisks next to other cheater's names like spitball users?

I just want the Cubs to top the Bears NFC Title Game as my highlight of the year.

by cubstoseriesby100 on Aug 8, 2007 1:54 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

If you believe

what Boutin wrote in Ball 4 and what Brosnan wrote in the Long Season, there were greenies all over the place in the '60s. Aaron may not have taken any, but a lot of players did, and management didn't stand in their way. In fact, until Neifi, I'm not sure anyone has been disciplined for amphetimenes.

If Bonds took steroids, I'm wondering what labels him as a "cheater" since 1) its use was apparently widespread, 2) it wasn't against MLB rules, and 3) I'm not certain it was against the law (acknowledging that prescribing a drug for a non-listed use is against the law, but I'm not certain that using it for a non-listed use is).
What accounts for the venon with which Bonds is greeted by the non-racist baseball public?

by bleacher on Aug 8, 2007 3:09 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Greenies

were in heavy use for a long long time. As were, spit balls, scuffing balls, using all sorts of other foreign substances to doctor a ball. Also, corking bats was something that was also common place for quite a while.

I think what gets people about HGH or Steriods, is they actually change the natural make up of your physical stature, strength and possibly eye sight. I'm not saying the other stuff was ok, it's just that steriods has taken this to a whole new level.

"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel

by MPH73 on Aug 8, 2007 4:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Here's all you need to know......

Greg Anderson has been rotting in a federal pen for refusing to testify against Barry. Why would anyone in that position do so, unless,(1) they had the goods, and (2) they had been promised the world for keeping silent.

I am a criminal defense lawyer, and I know that people with knowledge don't keep silent, unless it has been made worth their while.

This we can know with certainty:

Greg Anderson has the goods against Barry Bonds; and
He has been promised $$$$$$$$ to keep silent.

Go ahead ya'll. Try and refute my conclusions....

by perseman on Aug 8, 2007 6:32 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Completely Agree..

..I must be slipping, as I said this very thing on another board but didn't here. I was an investigator for 22 years doing white collar crime for a large company, investigating the company's executives and other security people, cargo theft, organized shoplifting rings and the like. I became an attorney in 1999. Anderson obviously has incriminating evidence on Bonds, no question. Then there's this guy, Patrick Arnold, http://www.mesomorphosis.com/articles/arnold/bio.htm, who has already done time for supplying Balco. To deny Bonds has done illegal drugs is to deny the sun comes up.

Santo Forever!

by BeerCub on Aug 8, 2007 9:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

take out the last comma to make the link work

Santo Forever!

by BeerCub on Aug 8, 2007 9:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Klosterman

Thought I would throw this out there.
FYI Klosterman is a rock/pop culture critic who had stint on ESPN.com as a Page 2 columnist. This was written when Bonds was closing in on Ruth's HR record.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=klosterman/060411

by Tangled Up In Blue on Aug 9, 2007 12:09 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I've just run across something.

why doesn't Babe Ruth's line have an asterisk next to it? He never played against a black man. I'm not saying that he wouldn't have been as good as he was if he had played against the best black players of the time, but we will never know. That's kind of what the asterisk is about, isn't it? It's to point out that comparisons between certain players in regards to records is complicated.

phat

by phatass on Aug 10, 2007 1:12 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs