PDA

View Full Version : Mark McGwire's brother says he gave him the juice!


soxinem1
01-22-2009, 08:53 PM
http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/story/11289854

The whole family must be wacko! Even if this is true, why throw your brother under the bus?

ode to veeck
01-22-2009, 09:03 PM
he claims he wants his brother to come clean

apparently they're also not close and the discosures are in the draft of a book by brother Jay => incentive may be money from a book deal

TheOldRoman
01-22-2009, 09:14 PM
In response to his brother: They are estranged. He is a slimeball looking to make money off of selling out his family. That is deplorable. I would believe very little of this book.

In response to Mark McGwire taking steroids: No ****.

BTW, I am not excusing him taking roids, but you have to admit that he was a great hitter. He hit 49 homers his rookie year, and that was when he was skinny. That was a bit of a fluke considering he only came within 10 of that total once before 94 (when his brother says he started taking roids). Either way, he was a huge guy who hit with insane power. He could have still been a great hitter without the roids. Compare him to Shammy, who was a ****ty player before he put on 70 lbs of muscle. Either way, McGwire hit 345 of his 583 homers in his roid stage, so it is hard to say whether he would have been a hall of famer had he not taken roids. He still would have come close to 500 career homers, provided he had the longevity, so he might have.

ode to veeck
01-22-2009, 09:27 PM
In response to his brother: They are estranged. He is a slimeball looking to make money off of selling out his family. That is deplorable. I would believe very little of this book.

In response to Mark McGwire taking steroids: No ****.

BTW, I am not excusing him taking roids, but you have to admit that he was a great hitter. He hit 49 homers his rookie year, and that was when he was skinny. That was a bit of a fluke considering he only came within 10 of that total once before 94 (when his brother says he started taking roids). Either way, he was a huge guy who hit with insane power. He could have still been a great hitter without the roids. Compare him to Shammy, who was a ****ty player before he put on 70 lbs of muscle. Either way, McGwire hit 345 of his 583 homers in his roid stage, so it is hard to say whether he would have been a hall of famer had he not taken roids. He still would have come close to 500 career homers, provided he had the longevity, so he might have.

Having seen a lot of McGwire his whole career in Oaktown, I'd have to say he was probably juiced his whole career, along with his sidekick Canseco

thomas35forever
01-22-2009, 10:14 PM
Why McGwire is still getting HOF votes is beyond me. Can't the voters see through him?

WhiteSoxFan84
01-23-2009, 11:38 AM
Why McGwire is still getting HOF votes is beyond me. Can't the voters see through him?

So what? Sammy Sosa and McGwire brought the game back to where it is today. Of course they used steroids and cheated, but they were used by the game. Who do you feel bad for? The other guys that weren't on the juice? Why? If it wasn't for McGwire and Sosa bringing the fans back (and they did), those other guys wouldn't be getting above average deals since the teams had more money to pay them.

voodoochile
01-23-2009, 11:39 AM
he claims he wants his brother to come clean

apparently they're also not close and the discosures are in the draft of a book by brother Jay => incentive may be money from a book deal

Yeah, he did it so Mark will find repentance and seek forgiveness, selling books has NOTHING to do with it. Nothing, not a thing, nada...:rolleyes:

voodoochile
01-23-2009, 11:40 AM
So what? Sammy Sosa and McGwire brought the game back to where it is today. Of course they used steroids and cheated, but they were used by the game. Who do you feel bad for? The other guys that weren't on the juice? Why? If it wasn't for McGwire and Sosa bringing the fans back (and they did), those other guys wouldn't be getting above average deals since the teams had more money to pay them.

That's bull****. By now the fans would have returned anyway...

jabrch
01-23-2009, 11:47 AM
Mark McGwire did steroids? Really?

Just look at the pre/post pictures...



1980 - Mark McGwire
http://www.snr-wolfe.com/drawings/artworks/1992_thin_man_siluet.jpg


1998 - Mark McGwire
http://www.ireporter.tv/Upload/baseballblog247.com/steroids.jpg

jabrch
01-23-2009, 11:48 AM
That's bull****. By now the fans would have returned anyway...


The diehards would have. The douchebags wouldn't have. And frankly, I'd have been OK with that. I don't enjoy a lot of the crap that walks through the turnstyles and posts on message boards.

I'd be just fine going back to how baseball was before Sosa and McGwire "saved" it.

hi im skot
01-23-2009, 11:50 AM
Deadspin has great coverage on this.

http://deadspin.com/5136177/mark-mcgwires-one+eyed-baby-brother-reveals-the-not+so+startling-truth?skyline=true&s=x

http://deadspin.com/5137330/cansecos-ego-more-steroids-and-the-hardcore-schwarzenegger-routine

http://deadspin.com/5137330/cansecos-ego-more-steroids-and-the-hardcore-schwarzenegger-routine

doublem23
01-23-2009, 12:15 PM
The diehards would have. The douchebags wouldn't have. And frankly, I'd have been OK with that. I don't enjoy a lot of the crap that walks through the turnstyles and posts on message boards.

I'd be just fine going back to how baseball was before Sosa and McGwire "saved" it.

Baseball is better today than it was in 1995.

jabrch
01-24-2009, 01:55 PM
Baseball is better today than it was in 1995.


I'm not disagreeing with that point - but I am curious as to how you define better.

There are points that are better. But I find it disgusting that a family of four can not spend what is traditionally called "a day at the park" and not get out of there for much less than $200 without having to not do the things that we always got to do as kids.

The cost of going to a game today is not better than in 05. And it has outpaced inflation significantly. Players salaries have eaten a large amount of this.

What is "better" today than it was in 1995? The game is still the same, only it costs more.

Again - I am not disagreeing with you - yet - but I am not sure I agree either. Curious as to what you support that point with?

voodoochile
01-24-2009, 02:19 PM
I'm not disagreeing with that point - but I am curious as to how you define better.

There are points that are better. But I find it disgusting that a family of four can not spend what is traditionally called "a day at the park" and not get out of there for much less than $200 without having to not do the things that we always got to do as kids.

The cost of going to a game today is not better than in 05. And it has outpaced inflation significantly. Players salaries have eaten a large amount of this.

What is "better" today than it was in 1995? The game is still the same, only it costs more.

Again - I am not disagreeing with you - yet - but I am not sure I agree either. Curious as to what you support that point with?

And baseball continues to set revenue and attendance records right and left so the price is obviously not that prohibitive...

jabrch
01-24-2009, 02:25 PM
And baseball continues to set revenue and attendance records right and left so the price is obviously not that prohibitive...


Sure - people can afford it. It's just not the masses anymore.

Voo - do you think the game is better today than in 95? I don't think it is better....to me it is still the same. I love it either way - but my constraint to get to games is not the $, it is the time due to family. (until my kids are old enough to enjoy it)

white sox bill
01-24-2009, 03:45 PM
Here I thought Bud Selig has done a terrible job. Now I hear MLB is better. Maybe a better question should be: Is baseball better BECAUSE of Bud or is baseball better DESPITE Bud????

jabrch
01-24-2009, 03:47 PM
Here I thought Bud Selig has done a terrible job. Now I hear MLB is better. Maybe a better question should be: Is baseball better BECAUSE of Bud or is baseball better DESPITE Bud????


I don't think it is so black and white if he did a terrible/great job...or if baseball is better/worse...or if it is because/despite.

To me, those are many shades of gray.

voodoochile
01-24-2009, 04:15 PM
Sure - people can afford it. It's just not the masses anymore.

Voo - do you think the game is better today than in 95? I don't think it is better....to me it is still the same. I love it either way - but my constraint to get to games is not the $, it is the time due to family. (until my kids are old enough to enjoy it)

I don't think it's worse and honestly given what is coming out about rampant steroid abuse in the 90's I think the game is cleaner today than it was back then, and that is better, IMO.

Don't get all misty eyed about days gone by the game has never been one "for the masses". Poor folks have rarely gone to games. Middle class with families have always limited the number of times they go and rich or young single people with lots of disposable income have always made up the majority of the attendees. More people go to games now than have ever gone on a consistent basis.

If the choice is letting in Joe Blow and having half the attendance or where the system is now. I'll take now every time. It's not like dad can't afford to take junior to the game a few times a year even people making 30K a year can find some seats by scalping on off nights or buying UD cheapo reserved tickets and limiting how much they spend at the game. Honestly, how many times a year does a family of four go to the game and do "the typical family outing". If it's three, Junior doesn't get a baseball cap every time they go and parents give Sox stuff as presents at bdays and Xmas to mitigate costs (not only finding sales, but using those gifts in lieu of others then Junior doesn't need a new cap at the game because he got one in December).

A family of four can go to a Sox game and without buying any Sox gear get out of the park for ~ $100 including dinner and a few beers. that's comparable to a family of four doing dinner and a movie with popcorn and drinks. Are they box seats right behind home plate? No, but they never have been. Are the parents drinking a 12 pack? No, but when have parents ever drank like that on a night out with the kids? People adapt. People change their expectations. People are going to baseball in record numbers. Something baseball is doing is right...

LongLiveFisk
01-24-2009, 04:33 PM
http://www.ireporter.tv/Upload/baseballblog247.com/steroids.jpg

Please tell me this isn't real. That it's Photo Shop or something like that.

Absolutely disgusting! :puking:

Nellie_Fox
01-25-2009, 01:31 AM
Please tell me this isn't real. That it's Photo Shop or something like that.You can tell it's not real by the size of the guy's "package." Roids have the exact opposite effect.

Frater Perdurabo
01-25-2009, 07:38 AM
Here I thought Bud Selig has done a terrible job. Now I hear MLB is better. Maybe a better question should be: Is baseball better BECAUSE of Bud or is baseball better DESPITE Bud????

If he gets credit for cleaning up baseball, then he also gets scorn for letting it get dirty in the first place. And I think he and many other owners "looked the other way" on PEDs after 1995 specifically because they wanted/had to "rescue" the game after the 1994 strike, for which Bud deserves much scorn.

If 1994 had not been aborted, MLB would not have needed the 1998 HR chase to rebuild fan support. If Bud had been serious about stopping PED use in the 90s, the 1998 HR chase would not have happened.

LongLiveFisk
01-25-2009, 12:00 PM
You can tell it's not real by the size of the guy's "package." Roids have the exact opposite effect.

That occurred to me, but I thought maybe he could have had some kind of medical or surgical enhancement. You never know when it comes to these obsessive personality types.

Frater Perdurabo
01-25-2009, 04:40 PM
That occurred to me, but I thought maybe he could have had some kind of medical or surgical enhancement. You never know when it comes to these obsessive personality types.

Or he just stuffed a rolled-up sock into his panties.

white sox bill
01-26-2009, 07:11 AM
Or he just stuffed a rolled-up sock into his panties.

Theres two tennants living there...the two guys in the lower apartment and the one guy in the penthouse LOL! The two living below shrink. The guy living on top doesn't

WhiteSox5187
01-26-2009, 09:27 AM
If he gets credit for cleaning up baseball, then he also gets scorn for letting it get dirty in the first place. And I think he and many other owners "looked the other way" on PEDs after 1995 specifically because they wanted/had to "rescue" the game after the 1994 strike, for which Bud deserves much scorn.

If 1994 had not been aborted, MLB would not have needed the 1998 HR chase to rebuild fan support. If Bud had been serious about stopping PED use in the 90s, the 1998 HR chase would not have happened.
Since Selig is nothing but a tool for the owners, he did nothing because the owners were racking in a ton of cash in the midst of the HR chase. Oh sure, sacred baseball records were broken and are now currently tainted (No one is ever going to hit 73 HRs again), but hey! There was money to be made!