The Cubs And Barry Bonds - A Date With Destiny?
I watched, as I'm sure many of you did, a fair portion of last night's 9-5 Phillies win over the Giants, a game where Barry Bonds moved to within one of second place on the HR list, behind Babe Ruth, by hitting his 713th HR.
Well. First, I was again struck by all the fawning over Bonds by the ESPN broadcast crew, without even a mention of the controversy surrounding him. This isn't something competent broadcasters do. Yes, I know ESPN is heavily invested in Bonds with his reality show -- something I refuse to watch, incidentally -- but the skew in favor of Bonds, when clearly most all baseball fans (excepting Giants fans, of course) are against him, is nothing short of disgusting.
Bonds, for his part, put yet another notch in his "I'm The Biggest Jerk Of All-Time" trophy case when he refused to sign the #713 ball for the fan who caught it:
"Will you sign my ball?"
Bonds smirked and said nothing.
After his news conference, Bonds shook Oliveras' hand and took a picture with him.
"I'm happy because I got a picture and he shook my hand," he said.
Happy? Maybe. But read on:
You have got to be kidding me. Sign a waiver? I'd have refused until Bonds signed the ball.
All of this relates to the Cubs, of course, because they'll be visiting This-Year's-Phone-Company-Name Ballpark Tuesday through Thursday of this week. Too bad Greg Maddux will miss the series (he's throwing tonight vs. the Padres), because I know he'd relish the competition with Bonds. Maddux' and Bonds' careers are almost identical in length, and Bonds is 34-for-120 lifetime (.283) with 8 HR vs. Greg. In any case, Bonds will face Rich Hill, Carlos Zambrano and Sean Marshall when the Cubs come to San Francisco. (He may not face Marshall, as the Thursday game is a day game after a night game, and he's taken some days like that for rest.) Bonds and Z have a history; Bonds didn't like it when Z pumped his fist after catching a Bonds line drive back to him to quelch a Giants rally back in 2003.
Seriously, I wish Bonds would just retire. I'm sick of hearing about him moving up the HR list. I've written before about how he was a Hall of Famer before he began doing steroids -- and there's little doubt in my mind that he did them -- and it's truly unfortunate that he wasn't satisfied with that, that he felt he wasn't getting his "due" unless he held records that would give him the public recognition he craved.
Well, he's got the single season record now, and will soon be second on the all-time list. But at what cost?
The Giants will be playing the Astros tonight, making up a game that was rained out last month. Astros manager Phil Garner says they're not going to pitch to him. (Link opens an ESPN video page, an interview with Garner.)
I say, good for them. As I wrote back in March, I'd walk him every time he comes to the plate, unless the game is specifically on the line.
And I've thought of another way for fans to register their displeasure with him. He's heard nothing but boos on the road -- I'm sure you heard them last night. But I'll bet he gets energized from those, and they show recognition. Here's a better idea: when Bonds comes to the plate, stand up in your seat, turn your back on him, and remain completely silent. Can you imagine the reaction if an entire stadium went silent on a Bonds at-bat?
It'd send a message, that's for sure.
I know I've opened the Bonds can of worms again, but we'll be discussing this quite a bit while the Cubs play the Giants, so why not start now?
0 recs |
251 comments
Comments
Perfect
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 9:28 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That's just it
by Faith plus 1 on May 8, 2006 5:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
dusty
by mike bornemann on May 8, 2006 9:31 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The pitcher who
I love the idea of fans standing and turning their backs to the field. I wish ESPN would make a similar statement and not show every at bat. I do my part and turn the channel.
by BringBackRyno on May 8, 2006 9:31 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Aim for his head
by gjdow on May 8, 2006 9:39 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Wouldn't it be great...
by ontheuptick on May 8, 2006 9:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
too bad...
by luv4cubs2 on May 8, 2006 10:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not to get political but...
by KevinFosterFan on May 8, 2006 11:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
As I've suggested
DmL
by dmlichte on May 8, 2006 9:39 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Probably not outraged
What would a HBP on Bonds' knee get you? An ejection?
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 9:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes...
by michigancubbie on May 8, 2006 9:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What a stupid statement!
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 9:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pardon me
So sure, if you want to hit Giambi, do so. Bonds has admitted to steroid use. Further he's a tremendous pud. So for the tremendous number of pitchers who have not used steroids, I'd like to know why they are not outraged at Bond's behavoir.
Here is one pitcher who I've gained tremendous respect for has he has the balls to speak up and not fear what the player's union has to say.
DmL
by dmlichte on May 8, 2006 10:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You have...
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No
Quit making this about Bonds being a jerk. It's about him being a cheater. If you don't care that athletes cheat and use roids, go watch pro-wrestling or something. But quit demonizing those of us who want baseball to remain clean. If you just want to see homeruns, your no better than the "sweet sassy molassy" sportscenter jerks and their MLB counterparts that let all this happen in the first place.
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 10:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's...
It's the disproportinate sense of outrage WRT his transgressions that I take issue with. I have news for you, every sporting event you've ever watched in your life someone has probably been cheating. Does that mean we shouldn't try to stop it? No, but the venom directed at Bonds has little to do with his cheating. If it did, we'd see the same outrage thrown at the rest of the players that have been outed. I'm also sick of all the talking-heads droning on and on about Bonds when it's obvious that the NFL has a much bigger steroids problem then baseball.
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 10:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not just cheating
Bonds' "I'm the best" attitude drove him to steroids. He deserves to be mocked, spat upon, and hated. Oh, yes, and he also deserves to have his head used for target practice.
by gjdow on May 8, 2006 10:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let me guess...
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 11:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks
by gjdow on May 8, 2006 12:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's...
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 1:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
People...
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know that
I know exactly what went on as far as skirting the rules throughout baseball history - please don't talk down to me as if I've never cracked a baseball book in my life.
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 2:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who...
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 2:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you
And I never said or implied that Bonds was the first person to cheat at baseball. I'm saying (again!) that that doesn't make it any more right.
I'm also not naive enough to believe that Bonds alone can bring down baseball. But again, again, again, that doesn't make it right.
Broken record here.
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 3:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
PS
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What...
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 2:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nope
I'd like a thorough investigation on current and former MLB players. I don't think an asterisk will do anything, we can't suspend him because there is no smoking gun.
In regards to your comment about no sanctions, you might be interested to read this, FWIW - http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2217361
"In 1991, then-Commissioner Fay Vincent effectively put steroids on baseball's list of banned substances in a memo sent to all MLB teams. Baseball could not test for steroids, the memo said, but should a player be caught with steroids, he would be sent for treatment and subject to penalties. This memo was never publicized and, seemingly, was largely ignored by both management and the players' union. Commissioner Bud Selig reissued the same memo in 1997, with minor changes but with the same lack of conviction."
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 2:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My apologies...
As you quote above, until 2003 steroids were treated as cocaine, marijuana, etc. Bonds has not tested positive for anything under the rules of baseball.
Further more pursuant to the other posters' calls for teams not to pitch to him that is the height of hypocrisy. Not pitching to him, unless it is a strategic decision, undermines the integrity of the game. You are now basing your strategy on making political statements instead of trying to win the game.
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 3:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I understand that
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 3:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What?
What does that even mean?
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 12:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It means...
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 2:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why would you automatically assume
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 2:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whoop! Whoop!
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 2:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I suppose the subject of Cheats and Liars
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Um, hey now.
I only want to have to ask that once.
by Sarah Hope on May 8, 2006 2:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Amen
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 2:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes indeed...
I have said that political discussion is off-limits here, and I think we ought to do the same for religion.
Thank you.
by Al on May 8, 2006 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My last comment on this
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 2:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm done with this topic
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 3:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, we all are.
by Sarah Hope on May 8, 2006 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
he has a point
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No. No. No.
Thank you.
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 3:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
thats what i said another day and ANOTHER BLOG
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 3:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, that's exactly what I said
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 3:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
sorry for offending you
Cubs game in t minus... err about 6 hrs.. this isn't good..
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 3:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Apology accepted
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 3:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You might....
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 3:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dude.
you said "that the people that advocate the most violence in our society usually claim that they are also fine upstanding Christians."
There's no gray area there. You said what you said. Be man enough to stand behind it. It's in print for pete's sake.
by Sarah Hope on May 8, 2006 3:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 3:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Apparently,
Why don't you spend your time by re-reading my statement and see where i ONCE accused of saying "All Christians advocate violence in our society".
What I said is that you are generalizing and to stop. But I also asked you to quit trying to defend your ignorant statement, but it seems you don't respond well to direction very well.
Why don't you read over my posts, look up the word "generalize", and quit making this page into a "10 things I hate about jolietconvict" thread.
by Sarah Hope on May 8, 2006 3:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
10 things I hate about you..
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 3:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Umm...
by Sarah Hope on May 8, 2006 3:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
heh amongst others...
Sadly, no. But it's only 4:30
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 3:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am way too
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 3:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh yes.
Atrocious.
Did you know there's a sequel??
Sad for you, though. Julia isn't in the second awful movie. :(
by Sarah Hope on May 8, 2006 3:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Boo
I'm a biiiig Shakespeare fan, but...this was just horrible.
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ooh, no.
by Sarah Hope on May 8, 2006 4:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
1996 Hamlet
A decent flick all around though.
by Faith plus 1 on May 8, 2006 5:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because...
We're also sick of blanket statements that, regardless of what you'd like to say, was a definitive statement directed toward defining people of a certain faith.
It was directed at people that advocate violence and their hypocrisy not people of a certain faith. So please stand by your ignorant statement. It's in print.
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey JC
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 4:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess
I don't know what your problem is or what your mommy did to you that has you regressing to a 5-year-old right now, but seriously. Your statement was phrased in a way that gave the wrong impression. Why do we know it wasn't the impression you wanted to give?
BECAUSE YOU'VE TOLD US 18 MILLION TIMES.
Give it a rest. Move on with your life. Go spread the good news and tell those bastards that they can't spread violence and debauchery in the name of God Almighty. Death to the crusaders! Whatever!!!!
by Sarah Hope on May 8, 2006 4:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why I won't drop it
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 4:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You shouldn't
by brianp88 on May 8, 2006 3:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
again...
DmL
by dmlichte on May 8, 2006 11:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
we all rooted for sosa-
i'm not a big fan of Bonds, but that ball he hit last night was crushed, and i think its good for sports to have a dominating a-hole to root against. (i.e. Yankees, Lakers, Labron, Clemens etc.)
by WrigleyCat on May 8, 2006 9:44 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think....
Sure, many suspected Sosa did steroids, same for Mark McGwire -- but since those two had nicer public personas, they got cut more slack for it.
Not saying that's right, only that it's the likely reason.
by Al on May 8, 2006 9:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
THAT
Bonds, on the other hand, has acted like he was entitled to be counted amongst Maris, Ruth, Aaron since he was born. What a tool.
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 9:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Al, are you really that outraged that
It's not like Bonds personally requested the waiver. Demonizing Barry for that is utter silliness.
It would be nice if once in awhile you showed some balance on the subject of Barry. A lot of things that you hate him for, are not actually his fault. I.e. press coverage of the homerun chase, reality show waivers, etc.
He isn't a nice guy, but he has never claimed to be nor has anyone else. Although he isn't a bad person in the sense that he isn't harming you or me, he's entertaining to watch as long as you don't take it personally.
Alas he isn't the only cheater in the history of baseball, baseball has a long long history of cheaters, it's part of the game's history.
by Will71081 on May 8, 2006 10:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Will...
I know you've disagreed with me and been a defender of Bonds every single time I've written about him. That, too, is your right.
I'd think that if Bonds had a shred of decency in him, he'd have signed that ball, ESPECIALLY considering the fan had to sign a waiver. A nice person would have done that. Barry Bonds is not a nice person.
And yes, I'd feel a lot less hostile toward him if, as I said, he had a shred of decency in him. Clearly, he doesn't.
He'll be a bitter old man who will have a lot of gaudy-looking stats, and you know what, the writers who have Hall of Fame ballots might just be pissed enough to ALL vote no on him when he is first on the ballot, which will keep him out.
That's what I'd do if I had a ballot.
by Al on May 8, 2006 10:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't mean for it to sound like I was
Aren't those waivers a necessity for any sort of reality show?
I think everyone who hates Bonds takes his personality a little to personal. He is an ass, but it ain't directed at you or me, he's a great player and enjoyable to watch. That's all I care about.
I have a problem with people on this site spewing their anti-Bonds remarks, as if he is the only cheater in baseball history. And if Bond's is out of the game that will somehow restore integrity to the game.
First off I don't think the game has lost it's integrity, cheating is a part of baseball. End of Story.
We should get down to the heart of the matter, people just don't like Barry Bonds, if it wasn't steroids people would find another reason to doubt him or hate him. Steroids are an easy excuse to take out your rage on Bonds.
by Will71081 on May 8, 2006 10:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not just the steroids
He did it purely for recognition.
The guy doesn't deserve to be in the 700 HR club, he deserves to get thrown at every time he sets foot on a baseball field.
by gjdow on May 8, 2006 10:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Waivers...
Frankly, I DON'T enjoy watching Barry Bonds play. He is too tainted.
Cheating is part of the game? That's a sad commentary. Doesn't make it right.
I'll be glad when Barry Bonds is out of baseball. I'd love for today to be his last game.
by Al on May 8, 2006 10:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
and while...
Your "Cheating is part of baseball" and "he's a great player and enjoyable to watch. That's all I care about" is a disturbing notion to me. You've oversimplified all of this tremendously and are just plain wrong.
DmL
by dmlichte on May 8, 2006 10:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nope
The fact is, there are great records in baseball that were set legitimately, by men with grace and class and integrity, like Aaron and Maris. And, like I've said before, I find it completely disgusting that Bonds has the nerve to cry "racism" over this whole thing. He hasn't encountered anywhere NEAR what Aaron went through when he was chasing the Babe.
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 10:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
CLAP! CLAP! CLAP!
by Al on May 8, 2006 10:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why dont' you hate Aaron?
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 10:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How do you know that?
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 10:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because...
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 10:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You didn't answer the question
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 10:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
SAying that
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 11:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He doesn't
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 10:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So...
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 10:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nothing
But it's irresponsible and downright nasty to attack a player for using drugs when you don't have any evidence whatsoever. You're just trying to make yourself feel better for supporting Bonds.
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 10:50 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
First of all...
I also don't fool myself into believing that all ballplayers played on a level playing field until the advent of steroids. The chances are extremely high that Aaron most likely used greenies. It doesn't lessen my opinion of him. It's just the way it is. To some extent Bonds is a victim of circumstance. Not a victim in that we should feel sorry for him, but in that he had available to him a program of performance-enhancing drugs that is unprecedented in history. We don't know what ballplayers of the past would have done if presented with this opportunity, but chances are that many would've gone down the same path. We tend to romanticize the past, when most often it was no better, and probably worse, than the present.
The hysteria around the homerun records is almost always ridiculous. People were threatening Aaron's life. People were outraged with Maris when he broke the single-season record.
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 11:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wha?
All I'm saying is that leveling a charge of drug use against someone who has never shown evidence as such is very serious and very misleading.
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
First of all...
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 11:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But no one said
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 11:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That statement
Preposterous.
by Sarah Hope on May 8, 2006 10:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let's say..
Steroids won't give you timing, they can't help you have a good eye, they can't teach you how to pull the ball, etc. What they give you is more power.
What they also give you, are serious health risks. So I would say, someone that would forsake their own body, their own health, someone with a family that somehow cares for them - if they would put themselves in that kind of danger, just for the chance of being the best* is a 1st class jackass.
Regardless of how you feel about the rightness or wrongness of steroids, the fact remains that they are dangerous. Period. And that alone should be enough reason to be against them and anyone who would choose to be foolish enough to use them for fleeting fame.
by Sarah Hope on May 8, 2006 11:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Amen
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 11:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
People...
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
actually
It basically a decision to risk long term permanent damage for a short-term investment.
If I were to take steroids I suddenly would not go Bondsian and be able to hit 70 homeruns. That is that point that the average Joe on roids couldn't do it.
However, it is cheating but I am more apt to agree with Joliet just on the point that you cannot stop Bonds from hitting the 2 more homeruns it takes to pass Ruth.. Only Bonds can stop Bonds.. and I do not see that happening.
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It enhances
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 11:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So do the Nike contacts
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 11:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also cheating
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 11:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No one
You start throwing logic like that in there, and pretty soon you're denouncing modern day players for having good doctors and MRI equipment. Or for having a wide choice in bats. Or for wearing shock-absorbent batting gloves. Then, pretty soon, you've lost all love for the game because you see everyone as being a cheater, even the ones who are playing by the rules.
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 11:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow..so you are saying
So when does the witchhunt of the steroid issue end though?
Do I believe that Bonds used?
YES!
Do I hate Bonds for it.. NO
Do I care that Bonds hits and passes Ruth.. Nope
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fine
But investigating Bonds is NOT a witchhunt. Bonds is a user. Plain and simple.
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 11:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeap
Put an asterisk next to his homerun record? What will that do?
Bitch on blogs that Bonds is a cheater??
Everyone knows that..
Suspend him??
Perhaps but we have no smoking gun yet.. or needle.. if you will..
So what is a rationale thing to do?
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 11:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Investigate
I have no patience for asterisks, and I think we've agreed before that that's no solution. You're also right about suspending him - we can't do that quite yet.
I guess for now we're stuck with bitching on blogs!
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 11:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Which is like standing in an empty forest
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 11:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm ok with that
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 11:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I apologize if you feel I am ridiculing you..
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 11:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, no
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 12:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Boredom is a funny thing
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 12:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I may be mistaken
You are right, only Bonds can stop Bonds. And stop himself he will. My point is that he is on a self-destructive path using something that is prohibited in his profession - and for good reason!!! So all cheating aside, what needs to be done to stop him - help him - needs to be done quickly.
by Sarah Hope on May 8, 2006 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re
Baseball will be better for many reasons when BB is no longer part of it, and the sooner, the better.
Visit The Digital Gazette
by Jed Taylor on May 8, 2006 11:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If this is referring to me..
I do not enjoy watching cooking shows either.. Except the one with the hot blonde. So I decide not to watch them.. Its the same principle.. Maybe baseball is more serious to everyone else.
I love the game .. don't get me wrong.. But i see it as just that.. a game.. and I will root for the Cubs until I die.. But I will never take it so seriously where I have to come on and spew venom toward another player in a blog. (Except if his name is Dusty Baker or Neifi Perez)
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 11:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
argh
Alas he isn't the only cheater in the history of baseball, baseball has a long long history of cheaters, it's part of the game's history.
Are we really going to start this conversation again?
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 10:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Al, opened the can of worms,
by Will71081 on May 8, 2006 10:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
True
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 10:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Except
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 10:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like I said
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 10:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No
I know one of the attorneys involved in that matter, and knowing what physical evidence the prosecution had, I find it VERY hard to believe that he would have been found not guilty. Then again, between OJ getting off and the way we put victims on trial in this country, I can't really blame the victim for not wanting to proceed.
But be very clear, he was NOT found not guilty.
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My mistake
You get what I'm trying to say though, right?
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 10:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I do
Sorry--that whole Kobe thing was akin to this Bonds thing for me---made my head explode.
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 10:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No worries
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 10:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nah
Didn't mean to bite your head off.
;)
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 11:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you can spin that two ways..
2- He was guility but she didn't want it to go to court.. she wanted out of the situation because of all the negative publicity she was receiving. The allegations about her mental health and sexual past were enough to scare anyone out of the lawsuit.
Now I am not a lawyer such as yourself but can the D.A. press charges without the victim's consent? or is that not allowed?
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 1:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The victim has no call in the ultimate right
by tradeforichiro on May 8, 2006 1:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
They can still press charges
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 1:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see..
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 1:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Her age
But that's just my opinion.
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
we're in agreeance.
So Does Maddux get his 6th win tonight and snap the Cubs 6 game losing streak? Notice the repetition of that evil number
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 2:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And
And I think the idea that women cry rape for some kind of gain is way over-blown. I defended dozens of accused rapists---there was only one victim I didn't think was telling the truth. And remember, I was on the defense. Does it happen, sure. But in far, far fewer numbers than a lot of people think.
Moreover, in this case, there was apparently a lot of blood---like, a LOT of blood, all over the hotel room, the victim, and Kobe. I always found the idea that she did it for the money pretty hard to believe. I consider myself a pretty tough chick, but even I wouldn't have had the guts to go through a rape trial in the national spotlight.
Anyway, back to baseball.
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 1:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The overall problem
But the fact remains that if you are in a public position, responsibility comes with the job. And an athlete is just dense to think otherwise.
That said, if we to only have athletes of a higher moral standard, we wouldn't be able to fill any rosters. To which I say, Whadderyagonnado?
by Sarah Hope on May 8, 2006 1:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A further problem
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 1:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hear hear
Wait, then should this blog be on primetime?? Waddya say, Al?? :)
by Sarah Hope on May 8, 2006 1:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
For every Barkley there is a
For every Kobe there is a Steve McNair.
These people are human beings they are capable of making mistakes (Marbury beating his wife) and also capable of doing great things (Marbury and the Katrina relief)
He is right.. Celebrities should not carry the burden of raising your kids. I guess that is where the conservative in me really comes out.. is my view on personal responsibilities. I believe we have to accept responsibility for the choices we make.. You started smoking? okay well whose fault is that.. the people who make the cigarettes or you for smoking them..
Prior to the early 90's I would have faulted the cigarette companies. Now I am not so sure.. Ultimately we must take our own responsibility for the things that we do. Bonds needs to take his.. Kobe his.. and others theirs..
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 1:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
YES
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i'm just saying
by Sarah Hope on May 8, 2006 2:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i dont know about you..
Anyhow I agree with your post.. you have to take some responsibility for your actions; however, people that say well look Sarah is doing this, So its okay to do this.. thats when it becomes not okay. Somewhere along the way theres a departure from a logical conclusion.
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 2:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Um, my name IS Sarah, after all
Probably.
Having a public position is a slippery slope. I don't envy anyone in that position. It's hard, but you HAVE to set an example. What example you choose is your decision. And I would love for people to start choosing the right one.
by Sarah Hope on May 8, 2006 3:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re
Professional athletes are entertainers, nothing more and nothing less. They have no higher responsibility than you or I.
Maybe this is what's really wrong in society. People see idiots like Tom Cruise jump up and down on a couch and rant about subjects he's obviously ignorant about and conclude that because his job as an entertainer puts him in the public eye (another problem with our celebrity culture) that he's somehow acting from a platform of greater standing than those watching. He's not. If anything, his profession makes him less likely to be well-informed.
It's the same thing with professional athletes. The failure comes not from their inability to meet some higher standard of behavior but from those who have such expectations. If anything, professional athletes are less likely to meet even an "everyman" standard of responsible behavior. From the moment they first touch a ball, they are pampered and excepted from societal norms. They are taught, over and over, that they are specifically not responsible for the things that they do, and others will clean up their messes for them.
The sooner people stop worshiping athletes (or any celebrity, for that matter), the sooner they'll start to see them for the people they are and not some idealized, fictional character. They play a game - very well, to be sure - but that's all. They don't cure cancer. They don't create new technologies. They don't negotiate peace.
When prima donnas like BB or KB use the standing they've gained from their particular talent the way someone like Bono has, then I'll start to sit up and take notice. Until then, I can do without them.
Visit The Digital Gazette
by Jed Taylor on May 8, 2006 3:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, that's brand new information
But it is what is freaking is. And as long as it is, any person with class would consider it their responsibility to use their position for good and keep their life as ethically admirable as possible.
The idea that this responsibility does not exist is a product of a lazy and spoiled generation who wants to do and have things their way with no respect for anyone else but themselves.
C'mon. Have some pride.
by Sarah Hope on May 8, 2006 3:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re
You said that people (sports figures) in the public eye have a greater responsibility (to whom is unclear) than those who are not in the public eye.
They don't. And the expectation that they do is (a) something they've never agreed to and (b) what typically creates disappointment and resentment when this assumed higher level of responsibility isn't met.
The idea that this higher level of responsibility doesn't exist is the result of their being no negotiation between the subject and his supposed public. Notice that there is, in fact, negotiation between him and his employer(s), who do include conduct clauses in the contracts to cover this very issue.
The lazy and spoiled generation you speak of has failed to meet even the basic standards of personal responsibility that everyone must. We're not talking about that. We're talking about something more, and something you seek to impose on someone else without even asking if they're willing to accept it.
Visit The Digital Gazette
by Jed Taylor on May 8, 2006 3:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree
Now.. what people cannot do is take those problems and say its okay Michael Jordan had a gambling problem so it must be okay for me to have one too.. There inlies the difficulty
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 4:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re
No one's arguing that what entertainers do passes for news these days. My position is that there is no higher standard of behavior to which they must aspire, other than, of course, what they may have contractually agreed to.
If you, or someone else, is going to say that there is, then you're going to have to say what that standard is, its source, how the individual becomes obligated to it unilaterally, and how it may be judged that the standard has been violated.
Good luck.
Visit The Digital Gazette
by Jed Taylor on May 8, 2006 5:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I believe I have addressed parts of your point..
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 5:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Um,
What I said that I said, I did indeed say.
I hope you made yourself feel better by your rant, because I'm just shaking my head wondering why you felt the need to spew out such an over-elaborate way of reiterating your point.
I did not say that their responsibility is greater, but it does get more attention. So in that respect, you could say that the pressure is greater.
If you make a good example for a kid in your neighborhood, no one may notice. But if you're on t.v., the whole country will. It's not rocket science.
You can keep this thread going, I actually have to do some work. But I will save you some effort by telling you that I will not be talked into advocating that celebrities live carelessly. It's just not going to happen. This I will stand firm on.
by Sarah Hope on May 8, 2006 4:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re
Look, I can't help you don't understand what you write. All I can do is point out that you've repeatedly claimed people in the public eye have a greater responsibility to behave a certain way. I've just filled in the blanks for you (i.e., compared to whom) and pointed out you're several crayons short of a box in the "I've actually thought this thru" department.
Now, I could take the time to quote back to you the various places in this diary where you've done that, but why bother. You're not stand up enough to follow thru with your position, so I'd just be wasting my time. Anyone with an iota of brain power can read and understand that this is your position for themselves.
You're welcome to try to weasel out with a claim that all you really meant was what people do gets more attention, and that's hardly something anyone's gonna disagree with. Shake your head all you want - it doesn't change the fact you made statements you can't defend and that you're unable to understand the difference between mine and "advocating that celebrities live carelessly."
What you're doing is intellectually lazy. I'm sure you'll have some postively witty repartee in response that completely avoids mine, but, then, I wouldn't expect less from you.
Visit The Digital Gazette
by Jed Taylor on May 8, 2006 4:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If the pressure is there..
How many Americans would you estimate smoke marijuana on a regular basis?
Why is it such a large deal that Ricky Williams smokes in the off-season then?
How many Americans do you think have gambling problems?
Why is it such a big deal that Barkley and Jordan have estimated losses of 7-8 figures gambling?
As a celebrity, you either rise to the level of moral pressure put on you by the media and by the expectations of the masses.. or you fail. That is the reality of the situation.. Just ask Ricky.
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 4:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re
The examples you cite are big deals to the kind of people who read People Magazine. They generally don't have the wherewithall to live their own lives so they live vicariously thru others. I personally couldn't care less what Ricky Williams smokes or what Jordan or Barkley do with their money.
Ricky Williams is having trouble because he's having to decide between living his own life, which includes getting high, and making millions of dollars playing football. The NFL, as a private business, has the right, IMHO, to set whatever restrictions it wants for employment. Ricky gets to choose. This is how it should be. Williams situation has nothing to do with the ever-present busy-bodies trying to tell others how to live.
Some of the greatest figures in the arts have been those who have rejected this idea that as a public figure they should change the way they otherwise would behave. And thank goodness they did. As Einstein so correctly observed (which he did about a lot of things), "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds."
Visit The Digital Gazette
by Jed Taylor on May 8, 2006 5:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually when I said below..
In case you haven't noticed the distribution and consumption of marijuana in the United States is outlawed.. so in that sense its the United States government that is holding the people to that moral standard.. My point with this post was that people have a tendency to blame their problems on others as sort of a sublimation of their habits in life.
You are obligated to follow the laws as set forth by the government in which you live.. in some instances you should rise above the laws in which you live.. Barkley nor Jordan should spend 6 million dollars gambling their lives away when they could give the 6 mil to the starving and homeless. Yes I believe moral standards should be set not as law or steadfast obligation but as general expectations that if not met.. would lead to some sort of blacklisting or boycott by the American public.. Won't ever happen.. but in my mind its a beautiful thought
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 5:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ms. Snarky?
Not only are you embarrassing yourself, you're embarrassing this blog with your cheap shots and atrocious behavior. Whether I deserve my job is none of your concern. The mere fact that you have made it your concern is just another example of how purely pitiful a person you are.
I have no doubt you have a job and I have every faith you do quite well at it.
Again, you have completely ignored everything I have said. Let's make this simple.
I believe that celebrities have a responsibility. I do NOT believe that they have a greater responsibility than us.
See? See how there were a couple different words in that last sentence?
Why don't you find the lonesome losers blog and wreak your deplorable havoc on them. I'm sure Chuck would enjoy the company.
Regards,
Ms. Snarky
by Sarah Hope on May 9, 2006 6:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh.my.gosh.
by Sarah Hope on May 9, 2006 9:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 3:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You Too Huh Julie
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 3:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I bet I know where you came from
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 3:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No..
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 3:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the kind words!
by Al on May 8, 2006 4:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not that anyone asked
On an unrelated note, I'm seeing a lot of Ad Hominem attacks today, and while I'm relatively new here, that seems to be a new thing as well. Is this par for the course, or is there something kooky in the water?
by Wood20K on May 8, 2006 10:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re
I admire Bono for his art and for his passion and committment to both it in-and-of-itself as well as where it has taken him politically. I could spend pages simply analyzing the creative genius of U2 as revealed in their recordings. What's important for what is, after all, a discussion of BB, is that when an entertainer is able to get the attention and then the committment of a man of the skills and accomplishments of Paul O'Neill in an effort to do something - anything - to address the abject poverty and health crisis of an entire continent, it speaks to the good celebrity can achieve.
But since this has come up elsewhere, let me also emphasis that I in no way believe Bono or anyone else has any obligation whatsoever to lift so much as a pinkie toward such work. And I imagine the fact that he, and others, choose to do so makes it that much more admirable.
Visit The Digital Gazette
by Jed Taylor on May 8, 2006 5:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your personal pissing contest aside
Bill Gates has set up a university with his money and gives away millions of dollars.. (Unfortunately Bill Gates would operate at a loss if he saw a 100 dollar bill laying on the ground and went down to pick it up)
Bono has based his riches in part to the public.. So he gives back by spending a great deal of his money in promoting the rehabilitation of war-torn third world countries. Can someone make him do this? No, in that sense he has no obligation, however, does it go a distance in increasing his star power and world reknown? I would say yes and there is where his obligation lies.. in further increasing awareness for something he is passionate about..
Bill Holden did the same thing last spring... Was he obligated.. No.. but he made a choice to support a cause with the resources he had available.
In this sense we all have an obligation to do what we can for the "common good". It might be the socialist in me speaking but I believe that everyone should do SOMETHING whehter it be volunteer through a church organization or childhood sports organization.. or give money to some sort of program. I believe we are all obligated to do these things and if you are in a position to do more.. well you do it..
If you disagree with me that's fine.. I don't expect everyone in the world to say, you are an insightful thinker.. Infact some people will probably read this and say .. this kid doesn't know what the heck he is talking about. And that is okay.
To use a quote that has been used many times on this site..
Sometimes you win, Sometimes you lose and sometimes it rains. That quote applies to life at large as well as baseball.
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 5:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re
There's a world of difference between asking an individual to aspire to a particular personal ethic - in this case, sharing his largess - and holding him to an external obligation to which he was never a party.
I agree completely with you that the communities I'm a member of are better when I contribute to them. The irony, of course, is that I, too, benefit, so it's also a selfish act. But the source of that sense of obligation is internal - it's an expectation I hold for myself. I completely reject the idea that anyone else has the right to tell me what I should or should not do, and hold me accountable to their expectation. And I don't have the right to do that to anyone else.
See the difference?
Visit The Digital Gazette
by Jed Taylor on May 8, 2006 5:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It was a joke.
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 6:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I got the joke...
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 6:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re
And if it's any consolation, I still remember when XRT starting playing U2 in the very early 80s, back when they were a great station. Back before there was such a thing as CDs. Back when we stayed up to the wee hours making mix tapes, one track off each record at a time and the trick was to blend the fade outs and ins so that there wasn't any audible click between tracks.
Now we can just fire up CoolEdit Pro, remaster a perfect digital rip, and produce a CD that sounds better than mass-produced. But whenever something's gained, something's also lost....
Visit The Digital Gazette
by Jed Taylor on May 8, 2006 7:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
They make you sign waivers for everything
Personally I like Bonds and love watching him play. People act like he killed their dog. You should hate dirty politicans. You should hate violent criminals. Barry Bonds is the bad guy in wrestling. Sports fans need perspective....
by JonH on May 8, 2006 11:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whatever
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 11:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You just implied
Your "bad guy in wrestling" analogy is totally false. Bad guys in wrestling are actors. Characters. Much, much different.
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, what I am implying is...
Sure it's not fixed and that's what makes it so interesting. The people compete against each other and we watch and it's fun. It's not life or death. The flack Barry Bonds takes is pretty excessive. Who cares if he is a jerk in real life. I won't ask him over for dinner.
by JonH on May 8, 2006 2:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see your point
I just honestly can't see how anyone can love baseball but at the same time not care if a player cheats. That makes no sense to me.
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 2:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bad Guys in Wrestlings
Bonds does it for free.. mainly because it gets his rocks off
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 2:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Finally someone who gets it
Its all entertainment.
Just playing out in reality without the results fixed.
by Will71081 on May 8, 2006 11:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it's different
Not to change the subject, but since when was LeBron an a-hole? I've never seen anything from him that would put him in that "love to hate" league with Kobe, the Yankees, Barry, etc.
And yes, it's good for sports to have a "dominating a-hole" to root against, but Barry's situation is different than just being "a dominating a-hole."
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 10:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who roots against Lebron?
Wow, sorry for fixating. I had a moment there.
by Wood20K on May 8, 2006 1:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's what I said!
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 1:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
is this really surprising?
the cubs broadcast team is financially invested in the team and has been papering over futility since the advent of television. this is how the world works.
by gaius marius on May 8, 2006 9:58 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I do know...
He never did it as blatantly as the ESPN people do. I mean, not even MENTIONING the controversy about Bonds?
by Al on May 8, 2006 10:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's ridiculous
But MLB doesn't sign his paychecks anymore. ESPN does.
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 10:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
radio broadcast
the whole thing is a joke.
by Bebo1060 on May 8, 2006 1:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But
Anyone else?
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 10:01 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Sure have.
If you are, in fact, pissed off.
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 10:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's the link to email
Have at 'em, kids.
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 10:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't dislike Bonds as much
I'd walk him every time he comes to the plate, unless the game is specifically on the line.
Heh, even then, they could do something like what the Dodgers did a few years ago - walk him with the bases loaded.
by VS on May 8, 2006 10:05 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That was...
The game was on May 28, 1998. The D'backs had a two-run lead, last of the 9th, two out, and Bonds was at bat with the bases loaded.
They elected to walk him, forcing in a run, and take their chances with Brent Mayne. Mayne obliged them by lining to right to end the game.
by Al on May 8, 2006 10:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Al
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 10:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ah, so it was the D-Backs
by VS on May 8, 2006 10:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why are we discussing Bonds
by CubFaninNY on May 8, 2006 10:19 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
There's been...
Just thought we could start this discussion, considering Bonds will be facing the Cubs from Tuesday through Thursday.
by Al on May 8, 2006 10:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Face it...
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 10:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We can't stop him
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
if a tree falls in the forest and no one is around
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 10:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
its a major news story..
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 10:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like I said...
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 10:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You don't have to like it..
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 10:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Then why care
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 10:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Theres a difference between matters which
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 10:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You just said
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 10:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow
Whoop! Whoop! Whoop! Political statement alert! Whoop! Whoop!
My sincerest apologies. ;)
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I vote..
Like i said before.. there is an acute difference betwen politics and sports. Politics affect me .. whether Bonds hits 1,000,000 Homeruns will never affect me..
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's the whole point!!
But ESPN is telling us only one side of it.
by Al on May 8, 2006 10:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And the other side isn't well enough documented?
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 10:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Didn't say it wasn't documented...
They don't have to AGREE with the opposite side, but they ought to at least acknowledge it exists. They are not doing this.
by Al on May 8, 2006 10:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sincewhen
You do not either i'm sure..
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 10:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 10:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't...
If they're going to be "the worldwide leader", then LEAD. They're not.
by Al on May 8, 2006 10:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Its a slogan Al
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 10:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fox sure believes
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 10:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't believe they feel:
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 10:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK, fair enough
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 10:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
To be fair
by Perkins on May 8, 2006 11:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Uh-oh
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Um
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Not Big Bird and the Sesame Street gang..
Please Don't tell me Cookie Monster need for cookies was just another Right-Wing ploy to get the poor hooked to sugar in order to prevent them from becoming wealthy !!!!!!! I refuse to believe that
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 11:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm sorry
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 11:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
In one sentence You've ruined my Childhood
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 11:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And...
by jolietconvict on May 8, 2006 10:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
turn your backs
Turn your back on Bonds when he's at the plate. There is a lot of power in that gesture-- much more than in booing.
Do it.
Do whatever we can to get rid of Barry.
by Romero on May 8, 2006 10:25 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I've heard...
by Clark B on May 8, 2006 10:26 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
This is...
Hey, maybe Bonds will retire before then.
by Al on May 8, 2006 10:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No Bonds at Wrigley
by Cajuncub on May 8, 2006 10:38 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That's a good point...
by Al on May 8, 2006 10:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
ESPN Ombudsman
As the site describes it: "If you have comments or questions regarding ESPN's coverage of news, issues or events, please send them directly to Ombudsman George Solomon using the following form:"
by jrm78 on May 8, 2006 10:53 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Uh-huh..
by Will23 on May 8, 2006 12:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not really...
It's not going to change things, most likely, but I applaud ESPN for at least having Solomon out there to address the issue - you better believe he's getting a ton of mail on ESPN's coverage of Bonds, its lack of critical inspection, and its shady deal for "Bonds on Bondage" uh, i mean, "Bonds".
by Chadnudj on May 8, 2006 2:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Picture from Philly
Cubs fans should do something like this when the Giants series rolls around.
by gjdow on May 8, 2006 11:17 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
You know what...
With that said, Miller has been the effectual press secretary of the Giants and is forced to address Bonds every day he goes to work. I'm sick of hearing the steroid conversation, and I think Miller assumes that the world knows the story by now.
I'd rather watch a San Francisco game without the constant attention and accusations against Bonds. It's become dull. And I was surprised they even put up that banner at the end of the game.
With that said, I hate Barry Bonds with all of my heart. I hope he stays at 713 the rest of his life.
"Babe Ruth did it on hot dogs and beer. Hank Aaron did it with class. How did you do it?"
by KevinFosterFan on May 8, 2006 11:21 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Man I wish Prior were pitching
th division clinching celebration in 03 when
assuming we would play the Giants in the post
season, Prior told the press that " He not learned
to respect my elders" A direct retort to Barry's
attack on Prior and Z . I just LOVED that comment.
However I don't think Z has learned to respect
his elders either so it might be fun
by jessica on May 8, 2006 11:37 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Cheating
Also, in regard to the conversation about the great Hank Aaron and the notion that mere availability both necessitates and proves useage, I'm reminded of a song by Jay-Z where he says, "My momma always told me don't argue with fools/'cause people from a distance won't know who is who"
by Wood20K on May 8, 2006 11:59 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Well,
(Can we use that word on this board? Eh, I'm not going to risk it.)
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 2:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was playing semi-pro ball when that song
by Wood20K on May 8, 2006 10:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Before
At this rate, by the time the game starts, we'll all by laying in the BCB common room with Xs over our eyes and our tongues hanging out of our mouths.
Which reminds me:
"Randy lay there like a slug, it was his only defense. . . "
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 12:03 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Haha
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 12:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I will be here this evening..
Anyone who wishes to join me in the Cubs drinking game this evening feel free.
Everytime you see the Cubs have a runner on second with less than 2 outs and do not get the runner in.. take a drink.
Everytime you see the Cubs fail to pitch their way out of a jam with 2 outs.. take a drink.
Everytime you see our fearless leader Dusty Baker look perplexed and unsure of what to do next...take a drink..
Everytime you see Freddy Bynum sitting on the bench.. ask yourself why he is on the ML roster and then take a drink.
Everytime you see our 3-4-5 hitters..whomever they are tonight strike out with runners on. take a drink.
By this pace you'll be drunk by the 3rd inning and there will still be 6 Innings of baseball left. GO Cubs :)
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 12:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Dusty says to Larry
Drink the rest of the bottle. Goooooooo Cubs.
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 12:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Grace did abuse
It's a hot topic, but let's get back to the problem at hand. Maddux MUST bust the streak tonight. I cannot be there, so maybe THAT will solve the problem. Darn work.
by San Diego Smooth Jazz Man on May 8, 2006 12:27 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That comment
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 12:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Said it before and will say it again
Against the Cubs and Steve Trachsel.
So it's pretty much inevitable this week, Bonds will go "high and deep" against the S.S. Titanic, I mean the Cubs.
That being said, I also remember the Cubs winning the wild card that season. Of course, they were swept by the Braves, so there's that.
Maybe we need Gary Gaetti back. He could even be a bullpen fallback, since he pitched a little.
by nextyearcub on May 8, 2006 1:05 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The Thing About Z....
Seriously, look at little Pedro Martinez, how many times has he been rushed in his career. Then take Big Z, 6 foot 5 260-270 pound Ox like him. I know I wouldn't do anything other than take that plunking and like it.
I say plunk away on Bonds. Serves him right for wearing that bullet proof armor and crowding the plate. Miss that armor, and see what Barry does about it. My guess is take it, and like it.
by CosmicCharlie911 on May 8, 2006 2:10 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Two other things:
Hey, I don't like the guy, think he's a cheater and illegal drug user (yep, steroids are and were illegal absent a prescription, even back in 1998), and would love to see teams walking him into retirement.
But that home run? Wow. I saw it live on TV and literally jumped out of my seat....I've rarely seen a ball get out of the park that quickly and that far. Sammy's shot in the NLCS in 2003 (the one that hit Arne's shack) comes closest in my mind.
2) Bonds will never replace Ruth in baseball mythology. You're talking about a guy who hit more home runs individually in seasons than most TEAMS hit during his career, in much bigger parks. A guy who hit his 714 in THOUSANDS fewer plate appearances than Bonds or Aaron, for that matter. A guy who played before modern medicine and training regimes extended careers into their 40s.
I mean, Aaron is an amazing athlete and rightfully in baseball's pantheon of legends. But even with the record, does his legend surpass the Babe's?
Nope. Same with Barry. 50 years from now, we'll still be talking about Ruth and Cy Young, etc. Bonds will be discussed as the Hall of Famer he would have been without steroids, but will never have the "legend" aura of Ruth, or countless other players, for that matter (Ted Williams, DiMaggio, Mantle, Cy Young, etc.)
by Chadnudj on May 8, 2006 2:32 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
This is part of the problem...
I have a real problem with that. ESPN has blinders on. Sure, report what's happening. But tell ALL sides.
by Al on May 8, 2006 2:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Legend?"
And now? Sure, he's passing Ruth, holds the single-season HR record, etc....but he's also known as a steroid user. Pete Rose might have been a legend, but once the betting on baseball thing came out, his "legendary" status was kaput.
ESPN is lessening its journalistic credibility with its Bonds coverage, and I guess that's the problem I have with it.
by Chadnudj on May 8, 2006 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re
Brand management is all about convincing a market that its products define the category, that it leads on the issue of what's best, what's cool, what's hip, what's to be paid attention to, and what, ultimately, has value that its target market should spend money on.
To do that, it has to sell as opposed to simply report. ESPN is completely in bed with Bonds, and its brand maintenance requires it to ignore the negatives of this story while it tries to pump the hype and get people to believe that this is the most important milestone in sports since the 4-minute mile.
Compare the way ESPN handles sports to the way FOX handles what it calls news. It's the same thing. Neither outlet is reporting; they're both packaging and selling a particular perspective, and doing so with an overall consistentency that lets you know what to expect before you even know the details. That's managing the brand.
People like brands. People rely on brands. It relieves them of the burden of having to analyze individual, specific instances of things. Of course, when people start letting others do their thinking for them, ESPN and FOX is what you wind up with.
Visit The Digital Gazette
by Jed Taylor on May 8, 2006 3:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow.
by elscorcho0682 on May 8, 2006 3:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree...
Thus, "The Worldwide Leader In Sports" means nothing. It's more like "The Worldwide Leader In Following The Dollar Signs".
by Al on May 8, 2006 4:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Afterall.
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 4:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sure it is...
by Al on May 8, 2006 4:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
In an era driven by image..
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 4:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re
For instance, compare how the New York Times handles news coverage with how ESPN handles it. The NYT could probably make more money taking an ESPN approach by hyping some things and ignoring others, but they'd give up any claim to jouralistic integrity to do so. They, thankfully, prefer the integrity to the marginal profits.
Own a business and you'll come to discover that while making a profit is fun, and certainly a necessity, there are other values you can accomplish that are just as, and sometimes more, rewarding than the number on the bottom line.
Visit The Digital Gazette
by Jed Taylor on May 8, 2006 6:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
While I agree
So theres no positive to smearing him..
No ratings.. No profits.. and no shiney happy people
by cubsfan2883 on May 8, 2006 6:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re
Visit The Digital Gazette
by Jed Taylor on May 8, 2006 7:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Costas NOW
These HOFers have to start speaking out, because it makes MLBs position that much more uncomfortable--which I am all for.
by cubbiejulie on May 8, 2006 8:41 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

by 

















