PDA

View Full Version : The game I love is killing itself


Fenway
02-08-2009, 10:42 PM
I guess I can not be shocked any more by revelations about steroid use by baseball players. My reaction to the news that A-Rod had tested positive back in 2003 just saddened me. Like millions of baseball fans I was hoping he could catch Barry Bonds and become the all time home run king with no questions asked. How naive we all were...

As a fan of the Red Sox and MLB and also someone who earns a living being a tech at games here is what really concerns me

There are still 103 names out there waiting to be leaked...one by one all summer long. MLB and the players association can not let that happen....just come clean with the names now as how much worse can it get at this point?

In 1998 I was as caught up in the Mark McGwire-Sammy Sosa chase on Roger Maris' HR record as anyone. I remember being in a packed Harvard Square bar when McGwire broke the record and fans were excited. I should have known better based on what happened at Fenway Park 10 years before.

October 5th, 1988 was Game 1 of the ALCS at Fenway Park between Oakland and the Red Sox. A week before sprinter Ben Johnson had been disqualified from his world record 100 meter run at the Seoul Olympics for having Stanozolol in his urine. A Boston columnist wondered how baseball would treat that situation. That afternoon when Jose Canseco came up to bat the park erupted in jeers as the chant S-T-E-R-O-I-D-S, S-T-E-R-O-I-D-S were directed at Jose who simply laughed. MLB executives most likely laughed as well. (BTW he had the game winning HR later in a 2-1 victory)


As a Red Sox fan I want those 103 names released to help erase doubt that any of the 2004 or 2007 World Series champs could be tainted. The city would be devestated if it came out that Pedro, Pappi, Manny or anybody else was dirty. But by the same token a cloud not of their doing hangs over them now especially David Ortiz. In the last 2 years Papi has lost much of his power and I pray it is because of an injury but the reality is now you have to wonder.

The Red Sox have so far come across unscathed in this scandal but fans certainly have their doubts about Nomar and Mo Vaughn. Nomar did not help himself with his infamous SI cover earlier this decade.

http://i.cdn.turner.com/sivault/si_online/covers/images/2001/0305_large.jpg
makes you wonder about Nomar, doesn't it...


But I worry most about my son who is now 17. His first real solid baseball memory is that of McGwire breaking the record when he was just 6 and how it had to be a big deal because FOX was showing it live. He has become a huge sports fan and in his short time on the planet has seen 3 Super Bowl winners, a Celtics championship and the Red Sox winning the World Series. But now he questions if it really mattered, was it on the level?

Baseball you must clear the air on this.

anewman35
02-08-2009, 10:47 PM
Eh. I guess I'm the only one who doesn't really give a **** about steroids. I care about the game on the field, I don't care how the players got into the shape they're in or whatever. Back when people were doing steroids, it seems like a large portion of people were doing steroids, so, whatever, it all evened out. I personally don't like or dislike baseball in the post-steroid era any more than I did, and it doesn't matter to me at all when these revelations come out.

BleacherBandit
02-08-2009, 11:02 PM
There's nothing anybody can do. Even if we ever get solid evidence that Bonds took steroids, will we be able to change his records? It's impossible, and baseball fans will have to live with it until the end of the game itself. I agree, the best thing we can do now is demand the other names be released and feel happy with our team, because none of our beloved players have ever taken steroids. (Except maybe Canseco).

However: I doubt Nomar took steroids. His muscles in that photo don't look too obscene, and I could imagine that he got that big the old-fashioned way. However, his numbers are kind of out-of-wack for a shortstop.

35 HR/.323/.362/.584 in 1998 (steroid year)? :scratch:

Whatever. I don't speculate until the national media does. :cool:

I_Liked_Manuel
02-08-2009, 11:12 PM
Nomar was the first name that came to mind when I heard that there were 100+ other players that failed that 2003 test.

I don't think that the game's killing itself, because really, it can't get any worse. The steroid issue ended a few years ago, but I'm not going to pretend that the hgh issue has yet to rear its ugly head....everybody knows it's going on, but nobody's doing anything about it.

One of the big things that's plaguing mlb in this is that every other professional league, for the most part, is staying clean in the press on performance enhancing drugs. If I had to make a bet, I'd wager money that over 90% of NFL players are on some form of illegal performance enhancers - and the players are literally killing each other due to it. Yet for some reason, MLB is taking almost 100% of the heat for this.

The biggest problem in all of this is that both sides, ownership and the mlbpa, benefit from the players taking performance enhancing drugs. There's too much money to be made when guys are hitting the ball out of the park left and right. We live in a time that sports aren't appreciated by the general public for the games themselves, but rather for what clip gets on espn or the 2 minute sports segment on the local news. I'm not going to completely blame the players in all of this, although they're ultimately the ones cheating the game, but there's a lot of blame to go around between the players, owners, sponsors, and even the fans that wanted it.

tstrike2000
02-08-2009, 11:13 PM
My question is...why did it take almost 6 years, or longer in some cases, for this to start leaking out?

SoxSpeed22
02-08-2009, 11:19 PM
Good thread. This era is something that we, as the fans, will never have a clear perception of. Now we live in an age where cheating gets rewarded everywhere you go. The worst part about it was that the players were not breaking any MLB rules. Baseball just assumed that since anabolic steroids are illegal in the US, nobody would use them. I always thought that since the federal hearing, this would get much worse before it got better.
Edit: You can also throw those super bowls into question.

MUsoxfan
02-08-2009, 11:23 PM
I agree, the best thing we can do now is demand the other names be released and feel happy with our team, because none of our beloved players have ever taken steroids. (Except maybe Canseco).




I think by saying that, you're only setting yourself up for disappointment if the names come out. Over 100 players suggests to me there were at least a couple on the Sox

WhiteSox5187
02-08-2009, 11:24 PM
:tool
"The grand old game has never been more successful in any way you look at it in any period, so I reject your criticism."

Jayson Stark has a great column about this: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=3892788

Of course, baseball could say "ya know what? These records are tarnished and are stricken from the record, they don't count." Though that in and of itself would open up a can of worms and also require a commissioner with, ya know, a spine.

I_Liked_Manuel
02-08-2009, 11:25 PM
The worst part about it was that the players were not breaking any MLB rules.

I don't mean to pick on you, but I don't know why this point always comes up. It's not the mlb's responsibility, or any other business for that matter, to reprint the criminal statutes in its bylaws or rules.

anewman35
02-08-2009, 11:27 PM
Of course, baseball could say "ya know what? These records are tarnished and are stricken from the record, they don't count." Though that in and of itself would open up a can of worms and also require a commissioner with, ya know, a spine.

That's something that I think would harm the game much more than steroid users ever have. We're never, ever, going to know everybody who used steroids, and if you start removing records, while leaving others, and there would just be debates forever about it. And would you remove team records too? Would you just have "no title awarded" for years in the World Series?

gosox41
02-08-2009, 11:27 PM
In 1998 I was as caught up in the Mark McGwire-Sammy Sosa chase on Roger Maris' HR record as anyone. I remember being in a packed Harvard Square bar when McGwire broke the record and fans were excited. I should have known better based on what happened at Fenway Park 10 years before.



I was never caught in the chase because there I had no doubt that both Sosa and McGwire were taking something more then just andro and Flintstones. Maybe it's the skeptic in me, or the fact that I hate the Cubs and would look for any reason to see them lose or be embarassed.

I would like to see the other names on the list, too. Even if it were White Sox players, I'd like to know.


Bob

SoxSpeed22
02-08-2009, 11:32 PM
I don't mean to pick on you, but I don't know why this point always comes up. It's not the mlb's responsibility, or any other business for that matter, to reprint the criminal statutes in its bylaws or rules.Well shouldn't it be? Professional athletes, or professionals in any occupation for that matter, should be held to a higher standard and that includes not breaking the law. The old saying 'it's not cheating until you get caught' is really holding true.
It should not take much to just put a rule that says, 'if you fail any drug tests, you will be open to any prosecution concerning that drug.' The reason that rules exist is to make sure everybody's on the same level.

I_Liked_Manuel
02-08-2009, 11:39 PM
Well shouldn't it be? Professional athletes, or professionals in any occupation for that matter, should be held to a higher standard and that includes not breaking the law. The old saying 'it's not cheating until you get caught' is really holding true.
It should not take much to just put a rule that says, 'if you fail any drug tests, you will be open to any prosecution concerning that drug.' The reason that rules exist is to make sure everybody's on the same level.

No, because the hierarchy of society doesn't place baseball above the law.

Ignorance of the law isn't a defense.

Bobby Thigpen
02-08-2009, 11:42 PM
I thought Mo Vaughn was either an admitted user, or proven.

soxfan43
02-08-2009, 11:46 PM
I just don't see how this all will end. Everyone has their varying opinions on steroids. I just don't see a logical end with it all. What does leaking these names accomplish? Personally, I feel what's done is done. Th eplayers, managers, management, media and the commish were all wrong on different levels. But what can we do now? It's time to move on and focus on the future of baseball. Stop retesting piss samples from 5 years ago, stop leaking names from 5 years ago. Start putting the efforts into getting testing that will catch the newer designer drugs like HGH. We can't change the past, but we can try to keep the game clean in the future. Will an entire era of a sport be tainted? Sure, but can't do anythign about it now.

SoxSpeed22
02-08-2009, 11:46 PM
No, because the hierarchy of society doesn't place baseball above the law.

Ignorance of the law isn't a defense.When you think about it, it certainly seems that professional athletes are above the law. But I don't want to get into any political arguments. I'm just saying that at the very least, there could have been a clause that indicated, that if a player tested positive for an illegal drug, then they should be held in a court of law, just like everybody else.

I_Liked_Manuel
02-08-2009, 11:56 PM
When you think about it, it certainly seems that professional athletes are above the law. But I don't want to get into any political arguments. I'm just saying that at the very least, there could have been a clause that indicated, that if a player tested positive for an illegal drug, then they should be held in a court of law, just like everybody else.

If you fail a drug test for your company, would you want that company to turn you over to authorities?

Every mlb contract is governed by U.S. laws, so it's not like a signature on a contract allowed one to use steroids. What'd be fascinating - and really blow the top off the steroid issue - would be for a club to opt out of a contract that it felt it was fraudulently induced into offering based on a player's steroid usage.

soxfan43
02-08-2009, 11:58 PM
If you fail a drug test for your company, would you want that company to turn you over to authorities?

Every mlb contract is governed by U.S. laws, so it's not like a signature on a contract allowed one to use steroids. What'd be fascinating - and really blow the top off the steroid issue - would be for a club to opt out of a contract that it felt it was fraudulently induced into offering based on a player's steroid usage.


Won't work with the yankees considering they just re-signed an admitted user in Pettite.

doublem23
02-09-2009, 12:10 AM
Baseball has survived scandal after scandal in its century-long run. It's already survived its first brush with steroids and I don't doubt it will survive this one.

No matter what, the game remains the most beautiful in the world.

I_Liked_Manuel
02-09-2009, 12:23 AM
Won't work with the yankees considering they just re-signed an admitted user in Pettite.

I think that actually helps the Yankees' argument

pmck003
02-09-2009, 12:36 AM
Too much money in the game for no cheating

jabrch
02-09-2009, 12:59 AM
The only way to clean up the game is if the fans say no... I don't think we have the stones.

areilly
02-09-2009, 01:24 AM
makes you wonder about Nomar, doesn't it...


His build doesn't look especially unnatural or chemically enhanced. I would think the more compelling argument for Nomar as juicer would consist a little of his power numbers following the arrivals and departures of Jose Canseco and Mo Vaughn, but mostly the nature of the injuries he sustained later in his career.

soxfan43
02-09-2009, 01:34 AM
I think that actually helps the Yankees' argument


HOw? It shows they don't care if someone did steroids. So how would that help them get out of ARods deal?

FedEx227
02-09-2009, 01:43 AM
His build doesn't look especially unnatural or chemically enhanced. I would think the more compelling argument for Nomar as juicer would consist a little of his power numbers following the arrivals and departures of Jose Canseco and Mo Vaughn, but mostly the nature of the injuries he sustained later in his career.

I'd say your groin being so loose, it feel/slithered off the bone being a pretty good indicator.

RKMeibalane
02-09-2009, 02:39 AM
Eh. I guess I'm the only one who doesn't really give a **** about steroids. I care about the game on the field, I don't care how the players got into the shape they're in or whatever. Back when people were doing steroids, it seems like a large portion of people were doing steroids, so, whatever, it all evened out. I personally don't like or dislike baseball in the post-steroid era any more than I did, and it doesn't matter to me at all when these revelations come out.

Did it even out for Frank Thomas when he finished second in the MVP voting to a cheater? Is that you, getonbckthr?

Nellie_Fox
02-09-2009, 02:40 AM
Did it even out for Frank Thomas when he finished second in the MVP voting to a cheater?Which allowed the "diminished skills" clause in his contract to be exercised?

anewman35
02-09-2009, 07:46 AM
Did it even out for Frank Thomas when he finished second in the MVP voting to a cheater? Is that you, getonbckthr?

Yeah, that sucks for Frank. But, what are we supposed to do about it now? Once you start retroactively changing things, it opens up a huge can of worms. Where do you stop? What happened happened, deciding 9 years later that it didn't actually happen doesn't change reality. Same with A-Rod - ok, so he did steroids 6 years ago or whatever. How are you supposed to fix things without making baseball history a total farce? Just accepted that stuff happened and move on.

anewman35
02-09-2009, 07:49 AM
Which allowed the "diminished skills" clause in his contract to be exercised?

Which also sucks for Frank (especially considering how he's my favorite player ever). However, I'm going to say that, honestly, if I had the magic ability to go back and change the last 10 or 15 years or whatever of baseball history and make it totally "clean", I wouldn't do it. As a White Sox fan, I would never change a thing that lead up to 2005...

oeo
02-09-2009, 07:59 AM
Eh. I guess I'm the only one who doesn't really give a **** about steroids. I care about the game on the field, I don't care how the players got into the shape they're in or whatever. Back when people were doing steroids, it seems like a large portion of people were doing steroids, so, whatever, it all evened out. I personally don't like or dislike baseball in the post-steroid era any more than I did, and it doesn't matter to me at all when these revelations come out.

So you don't believe in an even playing field? Most guys may have taken them, but what about those that actually cared about the long term effects?

MLB could have put a damper on things earlier on, but they chose to ignore it. Since 'everyone' was doing it, unless you were a supreme talent, you had to do it to keep up.

anewman35
02-09-2009, 08:05 AM
So you don't believe in an even playing field? Most guys may have taken them, but what about those that actually cared about the long term effects?

MLB could have put a damper on things earlier on, but they chose to ignore it. Since 'everyone' was doing it, unless you were a supreme talent, you had to do it to keep up.

There's never been an even playing field. Some people are always better than others. It might be because of injuries, or natural talent, or more practice, or whatever, but every person is different. I don't see how it matters to the game on the field WHY some people were better than others.

That said, I'm not "pro-steroids" or anything. I know they're bad for people, I'd rather not have a game as offensively based as it got to, and, frankly, I'm not fond of these "OMG what do we do now!" type discussions. But, baseball has gone in phases throughout history, and this phase is no different to me. It's like deciding nothing that happened in the spit-ball era counts, or nothing that happened before Jackie Robinson counts, because it wasn't an even playing field for all. You can't change the past.

the gooch
02-09-2009, 09:47 AM
http://www.donowdo.com/Gallery/Thank%20You%20for%20Smoking-Ar2.jpg
"We're not changing history,
we're.... improving history."

I_Liked_Manuel
02-09-2009, 09:51 AM
HOw? It shows they don't care if someone did steroids. So how would that help them get out of ARods deal?

I'm sure that the Yankees would argue that they offered Pettite less money over a shorter term than they would have had they not known that he was a former steroid user

Eddo144
02-09-2009, 10:06 AM
I don't mean to pick on you, but I don't know why this point always comes up. It's not the mlb's responsibility, or any other business for that matter, to reprint the criminal statutes in its bylaws or rules.
That's kind of a different issue, though. No one is saying that McGwire, Bonds, and others didn't break the law because it wasn't explicitly prohibited by their employer.

Taking illegal drugs is about the same level of crime, roughly, as assault. Should Ty Cobb's records not count because he assaulted someone?

I'm of the opinions the records should still count (wiping them off creates even more problems, such as deciding which records don't count, exactly), but we need to take them in context, like any other record. We realize that Cobb and Ruth put up their huge numbers before black players were allowed to play. We realize Denny McClain and Bob Gibson had their huge years when the mound was higher and pitchers were at an advantage. And now we'll have to realize that McGwire, Bonds, and Rodriguez had the advantage of performance-enhancing drugs.

As dumb as it sounds, McGwire was right about one thing: baseball needs to worry about the future, not the past. It can't fix the mistakes that were made 5-10 years ago, only take steps to ensure the same problems don't come up again.

spawn
02-09-2009, 10:14 AM
There are still 103 names out there waiting to be leaked...one by one all summer long. MLB and the players association can not let that happen....just come clean with the names now as how much worse can it get at this point?

From what I understand, legally neither the MLBPA nor the MLB can release these names per the CBA and by court order.

ChiSoxFan81
02-09-2009, 10:14 AM
I don't think it's necessary to make public all the names that tested positive. For one, it was a survey, and was supposed to be confidential. The fact that A-Rod has been outed doesn't make it right to out the rest of the guys. MLB should have taken their head out of their ass a long time before it did, but it chose to look the other way, and now we have a good 15-20 year period of steriod-induced performance. You just have to look at it through that lens. It's not pretty, it's not right, but you just have to see it for what it was. For most people that love the game, it's just a shame. Sure, we were all thrilled when McGwire and Sosa were chasing Maris, but looking back on it now, we see it for what it was: a sham.
There are people who say they don't care about steroids, that players should do whatever they can to be their best, and they just want to "be entertained". If you want to "be entertained" by 'roided-up musclemen putting on a fake show, go watch WWE. Baseball is not a homerun derby. Most MLB stadiums have already moved in their fences to accommodate the HR. I can deal with that. But to add steroids to the mix is just uncalled for. I want to see natural talent, not some incredible hulk created by a pharmacy. If you want to "be entertained", go watch those guys that blast softballs out of the park. MLB can be plenty entertaining and exciting, as well as much more intricate, without steroids. It is completely unfair to the players who were relying on their natural abilities to compete against guys on steroids. That being said, it makes the accomplishments of guys like Frank Thomas all the more impressive.
You can't go back and rewrite the history books. All you can do is put a big * next to the era in your mind. We all know Frank Thomas was the MVP that year b/c he was second to a cheater. We all know that Bonds' records are ill-gotten, and that McGwire and Sosa's records were too. The only recourse is to keep them out of the HOF. If we're keeping Pete Rose out, they better damn well not put these phonies in. It is unfortunate that baseball has gotten so big and money-driven and greedy that the league and some players have sold their souls. It's even more unfortunate that when caught, these cowards hide behind their lawyers or the union, and if finally confronted, deny to the ends of the earth, only to be proved as a liar. When you hear a Barry Bonds, a Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Rafael Palmiero, Roger Clemens deny deny deny, how can we believe anyone? They will literally throw away immunity on steroids just to deny and risk being charged with perjury to protect their ill-gotten gains. All we can do is see them as frauds and cowards, and move on.

jabrch
02-09-2009, 10:18 AM
I don't think you can "change" history.

You can make history accurately reflect what happened. I have no problem with cheaters being called cheaters in as public a manner as possible.

Anyone who doesn't see the difference in the magnitude of what PEDs did relative to other known forms of cheating is welcome to have that discussion with like-minded folks - I won't engage in comparing anabolic steroids to "uppers".

Eddo144
02-09-2009, 10:25 AM
Anyone who doesn't see the difference in the magnitude of what PEDs did relative to other known forms of cheating is welcome to have that discussion with like-minded folks - I won't engage in comparing anabolic steroids to "uppers".
While I agree with you that PEDs >>> uppers, I do take issue with your last statement. Aren't you being a little close-minded? Why come to a discussion board if you only want to hear opinions that closely match yours?

Moses_Scurry
02-09-2009, 10:42 AM
I don't think you can "change" history.

You can make history accurately reflect what happened. I have no problem with cheaters being called cheaters in as public a manner as possible.

Anyone who doesn't see the difference in the magnitude of what PEDs did relative to other known forms of cheating is welcome to have that discussion with like-minded folks - I won't engage in comparing anabolic steroids to "uppers".

Agreed. I don't want anything erased from the books. I just want any cheater identified publicly. I feel the same way about the lesser forms of cheating. PEDs, corked bats, sandpaper, spitballs, etc. I don't care. Reveal whatever is known, and society will decide who deserves the most ridicule.

white sox bill
02-09-2009, 11:17 AM
Maybe I'm in the minority here, but couldn't care less about who took what when and so on. If Nomar drugged, and I were him, I'd ask for my money back. He strictly a beginner on the weights, most gyms across America have dozens of naturals that look better than Nomar.

None of this surprises me in the least. If it came out the Frank drugged, I'd be shocked for all of 2 seconds. And for the record, no I doubt he did.

Wait until the new wave of undetectables comes out---and expect this trend to continue. Sad? Perhaps. Bad for Baseball? Yes... or no. Wasn't it Barnum of Barnum & Bailey that said theres no such thing as bad publicity?

Is this just MLB evolving? Coming out of the dark ages? Time will tell. But when I see that first Robin, I've noticed days are getting longer and I've dodged yet another marriage proposal by giving a generous Valentine's Day present to my SO, I know its time for the game i still love and always will.

spawn
02-09-2009, 11:20 AM
None of this surprises me in the least. If it came out the Frank drugged, I'd be shocked for all of 2 seconds. And for the record, no I doubt he did.

I was gong to say this, but I was afraid of the backlash. It's gotten to the point where I don't believe anyone. For the record, I don't believe Frank juiced. He's been one of if not the most vocal player regarding PHD testing. However, I've heard the denials before (A-Rod, Bonds, Clemens), and now, I just have a hard time believing any of them.

ChiSoxFan81
02-09-2009, 11:23 AM
I was gong to say this, but I was afraid of the backlash. It's gotten to the point where I don't believe anyone. For the record, I don't believe Frank juiced. He's been one of if not the most vocal player regarding PHD testing. However, I've heard the denials before (A-Rod, Bonds, Clemens), and now, I just have a hard time believing any of them.

But Frank doesn't have to deny, because he's never been accused. It'd be pretty stupid to co-chair the anti-steroid committee and have used them yourself. Everyone knows Frank was always a large man. He didn't need steroids.

areilly
02-09-2009, 11:30 AM
Wait until the new wave of undetectables comes out---and expect this trend to continue. Sad? Perhaps. Bad for Baseball? Yes... or no. Wasn't it Barnum of Barnum & Bailey that said theres no such thing as bad publicity?

Brendan Behan made the quote about "There's no such thing as bad publicity except your own obituary."

P.T. Barnum dished the equally applicable "There's a sucker born every minute.

white sox bill
02-09-2009, 11:34 AM
Brendan Behan made the quote about "There's no such thing as bad publicity except your own obituary."

P.T. Barnum dished the equally applicable "There's a sucker born every minute.

Great quotes, esp the latter when pertaining to cub fans

CubKilla
02-09-2009, 11:42 AM
*

spawn
02-09-2009, 11:45 AM
But Frank doesn't have to deny, because he's never been accused. It'd be pretty stupid to co-chair the anti-steroid committee and have used them yourself. Everyone knows Frank was always a large man. He didn't need steroids.
It's also pretty stupid to go in front of Congress and deny using when you know you have. That's the lesson Rafael Palmeiro has learned. That's the lesson Roger Clemens is learning. As I said, I don't believe he used. By the same token, I won't be surprised if his name is on the list as well. Also, people need to really stop believing that steroids only makes you bigger, that if you're already a big man you don't need it. And again, I'll stress that I don't believe Frank Thomas ever took steroids!

ChiSoxFan81
02-09-2009, 11:52 AM
It's also pretty stupid to go in front of Congress and deny using when you know you have. That's the lesson Rafael Palmeiro has learned. That's the lesson Roger Clemens is learning. As I said, I don't believe he used. By the same token, I won't be surprised if his name is on the list as well. Also, people need to really stop believing that steroids only makes you bigger, that if you're already a big man you don't need it. And again, I'll stress that I don't believe Frank Thomas ever took steroids!

Well, I mostly agree with you, but I'm talking about one specific player. It honestly has nothing to do with the fact that he's my favorite player ever either. If I suspected he took steroids, I'd have no problem saying so. You can't throw out the baby with the bathwater. Plus, being the co-chair of the anti-doping committee says alot more about his character than pointing your finger at Congress. No one would be stupid enough to take that position if there was any chance they'd be discovered as a user later. As for me, I'd be VERY SURPRISED if Frank's name showed up on any list.

white sox bill
02-09-2009, 12:22 PM
Picture Frank ON steroids, didn't he play football at Auburn or was it Georgia or Alabama w/Bo Jackson. Make him fullback...watch Frank run over all 11 men.

I doubt very much he juiced. But man if he ever did, watch out!

Jurr
02-09-2009, 12:38 PM
I wouldn't be surprised to hear any name, including Frank's. Remember that he tore his triceps muscle in half during the 2001 season. He very well may have used some to help rehab/recovery. Who knows?

I sincerely hope that the man didn't partake in this crap, but I do know that the moment a competitor sees others picking up big paychecks from increased muscle/bat speed, it's definitely a hard thing to pass up. I just hope not.

ChiSoxFan81
02-09-2009, 12:48 PM
I wouldn't be surprised to hear any name, including Frank's. Remember that he tore his triceps muscle in half during the 2001 season. He very well may have used some to help rehab/recovery. Who knows?

I sincerely hope that the man didn't partake in this crap, but I do know that the moment a competitor sees others picking up big paychecks from increased muscle/bat speed, it's definitely a hard thing to pass up. I just hope not.

And here you see the true effect of the steroid era. No one is immune to suspicion. It's sad. I prefer to have some sort of proof or evidence before condemning someone. There's not so much as an anecdote or list that mentions Frank. Yet, here are people who wouldn't be at all surprised if his name was linked to PEDs. Seriously? You wouldn't be surprised? At all? If so, then it really sucks that cowards like Bonds, Clemens, etc. ruined it for guys like him.

captainclutch24
02-09-2009, 01:24 PM
Talking to my friend who is in the Astros farm system he said when he first got into the minors in 2004 that steroids and HGH use was rampant throughout baseball. He says all the stuff you hear about people getting suspend after second positive test is false for stuff such as amphetamines. It is actually their 4th or 5th time testing positive, they just tell the media it was his second. I tend to believe him because he got in trouble a few times for a drug problem involving pills (not steroids or steroid related) in his second year and third that was kept in house.

soxinem1
02-09-2009, 02:05 PM
While it will be very embarassing if even semi-stars come out as the other 103 players, I doubt it will be any reason for the games demise.

There have been suspicions about every player who had a spike in HR production, many of which turned out to be true.

But people are still going to games. I recall when drawing 2 million fans put you among the tops in attendance, now you are near the bottom if you draw 2 million. Prices for tickets have escalated since salaries skyrocketed, but more people by tickets today for baseball games than ever before. This includes scores of minor league teams too.

While the economy may slow attendance this year, unless there is a strike again in the future, fans will still go to games.

I remember Gaylord Perry throwing illegal spitters and Don Sutton scuffing baseballs in his glove in a nationally televised game, but both were easilly inducted into the HOF, and many joked about their cheating.

MLB has had a history of fixed games, altered baseballs, corked bats, performance enhancing substances, and whatever else we could drum up to negatively impact baseball, and it still thrives.

Corked bats were rampant in the 70's and 80's. I'd have to wager many All-Stars and eventual HOF players used corked bats on several occasions.

Just like a conquered computer virus, it is a game in which its participants will do whatever it can to gain an edge. Once the edge is negated, they find another method, just like the computer hackers.

Be it the scoreboard guy flashing Willie Mays signs, Jeff Torborg putting Joe Nossek in a skybox to steal signs, or Barry taking the clear, teams and players will do what they can to gain that edge.

Is it right or even acceptable? Of course not. But it is historically there and different means of cheating will always exist.

Right now, you can be damn sure some junior grade chemist is working on a non-detectable substance to enhance performance as we speak.

And sometime in the future, a new scandal will be upon us.

soxinem1
02-09-2009, 02:23 PM
Naturally when the news breaks with another super-star being accused of cheating, everyone gets into this hissy fit about cheating and it's negative impact on MLB. Sure, it is only natural.

But honestly, is it any different than tilting your baselines inward to keep bunts fair?

Or watering down the first base area and the batters boxes just to slow down fast runners?

How about keeping your grass tall so your rangeless infield can have more time to get to ground balls?

Closing your retratable roof just because your team home record is better when it is not open?

How about 1:05 afternoon game time starts so your closer can come in at a certain time when the shadows just happen to be creeping up on homeplate?

Now saying this, sure, I think the steroid mess is bad, but honestly, even our own team included, doesn't everyone technically cheat in some fashion?

jabrch
02-09-2009, 02:33 PM
But honestly, is it any different than tilting your baselines inward to keep bunts fair?

If you tilt your baselines only when you are hitting - no. If the field is the same for your opponent as it is for you, then yes - it is different.

Or watering down the first base area and the batters boxes just to slow down fast runners?

As long as the grass is the same for both teams...it is fair.

How about keeping your grass tall so your rangeless infield can have more time to get to ground balls?

As long as the grass isn't growing inches between innings, then being cut again...it is fair.

Closing your retratable roof just because your team home record is better when it is not open?

Do you close and open it each inning?

How about 1:05 afternoon game time starts so your closer can come in at a certain time when the shadows just happen to be creeping up on homeplate?

Is the sun hopping around each half inning?

doesn't everyone technically cheat in some fashion?

No. None of the above are cheating. There are a lot of major leaguers who did not cheat. Using chemicals that are both against US law, and then later against MLB policy, is not anything comparable to groundskeeping. I can't believe you'd even try and make such a preposterous arguement.

oeo
02-09-2009, 02:37 PM
How about 1:05 afternoon game time starts so your closer can come in at a certain time when the shadows just happen to be creeping up on homeplate?

There's a new one. :?:

soxinem1
02-09-2009, 02:44 PM
can't believe you'd even try and make such a preposterous arguement.

Your sarcasms aside, as I noted, I do believe the steriod mess is bad.

Remember the Astros fighting to close the roof in the World Series?

Comiskey Park having the firehoses tipped towards the baseline?

The cubs keeping high grass so Sandberg, Santo and Cey (among others ) could reach balls easier?

Why would those teams go through all that? To gain an edge.

As I alluded in my post prior to the one you paraphrased, methods of cheating or gaining an edge are a long-standing tradition, it is not just the drugs.

Chez
02-09-2009, 03:01 PM
I think it's going to be very interesting on this site if it's revealed that some of the players on this list are either current or former White Sox.

areilly
02-09-2009, 03:06 PM
I think it's going to be very interesting on this site if it's revealed that some of the players on this list are either current or former White Sox.

Haven't you heard? These Sox are the Clean Sox. No Sox player ever did something that violated either the rules or the spirit of the game. Steroids, HGH and the like were expressly forbidden and superman Frank Thomas personally drank the blood of every player in a White Sox uniform to make sure there was nothing suspicious in it.

Craig Grebeck
02-09-2009, 03:15 PM
The only way to clean up the game is if the fans say no... I don't think we have the stones.

The game has never been clean, and steroids haven't set a new low. Fans are (hopefully) smart enough to realize that on a sliding scale of baseball impropriety, steroids aren't what the media would have them believe.

Chez
02-09-2009, 03:35 PM
Haven't you heard? These Sox are the Clean Sox. No Sox player ever did something that violated either the rules or the spirit of the game. Steroids, HGH and the like were expressly forbidden and superman Frank Thomas personally drank the blood of every player in a White Sox uniform to make sure there was nothing suspicious in it.

I've written down four names of prominent White Sox players during that era. I'd be shocked if at least one name isn't on the "list" -- if those names are ever revealed.

ChiSoxFan81
02-09-2009, 03:52 PM
Your sarcasms aside, as I noted, I do believe the steriod mess is bad.

Remember the Astros fighting to close the roof in the World Series?

Comiskey Park having the firehoses tipped towards the baseline?

The cubs keeping high grass so Sandberg, Santo and Cey (among others ) could reach balls easier?

Why would those teams go through all that? To gain an edge.

As I alluded in my post prior to the one you paraphrased, methods of cheating or gaining an edge are a long-standing tradition, it is not just the drugs.

I can't believe you are attempting to make this argument. The things you are talking about aren't cheating because both teams play in the same conditions. Sure, the Sox wet down in front of home plate when they play bunting teams. But if the Sox need to bunt, they have the same situation. Just because they don't bunt as much as other teams doesn't make this cheating. If you want to even it up, either every player in MLB has to take steroids, or none can. Considering that it is illegal under U.S. law, I'm going to go with none, and anyone using is gaining an UNFAIR advantage, thus, they are cheating.

ChiSoxFan81
02-09-2009, 03:55 PM
The game has never been clean, and steroids haven't set a new low. Fans are (hopefully) smart enough to realize that on a sliding scale of baseball impropriety, steroids aren't what the media would have them believe.

What do you mean by "clean"? And what is worse than artificially altering your body to perform above your natural abilities?

areilly
02-09-2009, 04:02 PM
What do you mean by "clean"? And what is worse than artificially altering your body to perform above your natural abilities?

Throwing a World Series.

Fixing games.

Disallowing players entry into the league on the basis of race.

No-bid, zero-discolosure deals on publicly financed stadiums.

There are others, I just can't think of them right now.

Hendu
02-09-2009, 04:04 PM
The game has never been clean, and steroids haven't set a new low. Fans are (hopefully) smart enough to realize that on a sliding scale of baseball impropriety, steroids aren't what the media would have them believe.

True...throwing the World Series, and decades of segregation make this scandal look like child's play. And those are just off the top of my head...I'm sure there are plenty more, for example the owners' treatment of players pre-free agency, etc. The steroids stuff is bad, but baseball has survived through worse.

Frontman
02-09-2009, 04:48 PM
Fenway,

Keep in mind this game survived the Black Sox scandal. I'm sure other times the mafia or others interfered with it. Baseball with continue to grow and evolve. While my years as a fan in my 20's/early 30's will be suspect as to who was doing what and how; baseball will continue on. It's a constant to America, and I doubt it will fall away even with this.

soxfan43
02-09-2009, 04:50 PM
Throwing a World Series.

Fixing games.

Disallowing players entry into the league on the basis of race.

No-bid, zero-discolosure deals on publicly financed stadiums.

There are others, I just can't think of them right now.


Very good points there. Baseball has survived worse.

Hendu
02-09-2009, 05:03 PM
Almost forgot - how about the 1994 strike? The World Series, which had taken place through a depression and world wars, canceled because of some silly labor dispute? Baseball will be fine...as long as people start coming clean voluntarily and stop trying to stonewall.

DSpivack
02-09-2009, 05:06 PM
Almost forgot - how about the 1994 strike? The World Series, which had taken place through a depression and world wars, canceled because of some silly labor dispute? Baseball will be fine...as long as people start coming clean voluntarily and stop trying to stonewall.

That even had it's part in all the steroid business of the 90's. It took the HR chase in 1998 for baseball to recover from the 1994 strike, most seemed to look the other way with Sosa and McGwire.

ChiSoxFan81
02-09-2009, 05:08 PM
Throwing a World Series.

Fixing games.

Disallowing players entry into the league on the basis of race.

No-bid, zero-discolosure deals on publicly financed stadiums.

There are others, I just can't think of them right now.

True...throwing the World Series, and decades of segregation make this scandal look like child's play. And those are just off the top of my head...I'm sure there are plenty more, for example the owners' treatment of players pre-free agency, etc. The steroids stuff is bad, but baseball has survived through worse.

As far as cheating goes, though, this is tops. It's worse than corked bats or spitballs. Yes, throwing games is worse, but it's also the opposite of cheating to win. It's cheating to lose, and with the money being thrown around these days, you'll never see that in a million years. I'm not so much talking about the survivability of baseball as I am the competitiveness. Yes, baseball has survived worse. But the way Grebeck made it sound, it was almost like "big deal, they did steroids, baseball players have done worse", when in reality, it is a big deal. Just because a lot of people start breaking a rule doesn't mean it's the rule that's wrong.

white sox bill
02-09-2009, 05:17 PM
As far as cheating goes, though, this is tops. It's worse than corked bats or spitballs. Yes, throwing games is worse, but it's also the opposite of cheating to win. It's cheating to lose, and with the money being thrown around these days, you'll never see that in a million years. I'm not so much talking about the survivability of baseball as I am the competitiveness. Yes, baseball has survived worse. But the way Grebeck made it sound, it was almost like "big deal, they did steroids, baseball players have done worse", when in reality, it is a big deal. Just because a lot of people start breaking a rule doesn't mean it's the rule that's wrong.

There plenty wrong in probably all sports. Its only as big as one makes it to be. Our sport will be fine, it will recover after this speedbump. Its still up there in my book. That will never change. Now what the NHL went through by cancelling entire season a few yrs back was a poison dagger. Its still recoperating.

soxinem1
02-09-2009, 05:25 PM
I can't believe you are attempting to make this argument. The things you are talking about aren't cheating because both teams play in the same conditions. Sure, the Sox wet down in front of home plate when they play bunting teams. But if the Sox need to bunt, they have the same situation. Just because they don't bunt as much as other teams doesn't make this cheating. If you want to even it up, either every player in MLB has to take steroids, or none can. Considering that it is illegal under U.S. law, I'm going to go with none, and anyone using is gaining an UNFAIR advantage, thus, they are cheating.

Look, there are many, many things in baseball history that have been UNFAIR. And scores of incidents that are cheating.

Banning players, for example, because of their heritage. Went on for decades.

How about Reinsdorf holding the state hostage and refusing to commit one dime for a place for HIS team to play?

Taking money to toss a World Series?

I also have said several times the steriod thing is a mess, but it is no different than corked bats, scuffed/loaded balls, fixed games, or fixed field conditions.

And many of those who took part in these incidents, like Cap Anson, Gaylord Perry, and Don Sutton to name a few, are in the HOF.

Bottom line is how do you justify crucifying ARod when these players I just mentioned are enshrined as greats?

areilly
02-09-2009, 05:29 PM
Yes, throwing games is worse, but it's also the opposite of cheating to win. It's cheating to lose, and with the money being thrown around these days, you'll never see that in a million years.

Regardless of what category of cheating it falls under, it's still a cheat. It's like arguing which type of embezzlement someone engineered.

Regarding throwing a game, well, that might be easier than we think, all things considered. Take a disgruntled reliever making league minimum and put $100k in front of him. Convince me of how impossible a scenario that is.

Hendu
02-09-2009, 05:39 PM
Regardless of what category of cheating it falls under, it's still a cheat. It's like arguing which type of embezzlement someone engineered.

Regarding throwing a game, well, that might be easier than we think, all things considered. Take a disgruntled reliever making league minimum and put $100k in front of him. Convince me of how impossible a scenario that is.

Or for that matter...how about Gary Sheffield intentionally committing errors so he would get shipped out of Milwaukee?

soxinem1
02-09-2009, 05:49 PM
Or for that matter...how about Gary Sheffield intentionally committing errors so he would get shipped out of Milwaukee?

Wow, that seems like yesterday. The supposed Rookie of the Year Shortstop.

TDog
02-09-2009, 06:58 PM
Fenway,

Keep in mind this game survived the Black Sox scandal. I'm sure other times the mafia or others interfered with it. Baseball with continue to grow and evolve. While my years as a fan in my 20's/early 30's will be suspect as to who was doing what and how; baseball will continue on. It's a constant to America, and I doubt it will fall away even with this.


Of course, baseball recovered the Black Sox scandal with a juiced baseball and Babe Ruth -- although I'm not sure if the juiced baseball and Babe Ruth were just coincidental.

Baseball survived the Great Depression by allowing a couple of teams to dominate and many have-nots only making their paychecks by serving as pseudo-farm teams for the haves. That mode of operation also continued after World War II. People complain about the plight of the small market teams in baseball today, but for much of the last century, their plight was worse. There was plenty of hitting, though. If memory serves, in the 1930s, at least one last place team recorded a season batting average higher than .300.

And, as noted, baseball survived the 1994 aborted season with the steroids-fueled home run derby that followed.

Baseball is different because people care that players may have been using steroids. There is no similar outrage accompanying professional football, in which steroids use is more common than in baseball. As someone who sports-wise only cares about baseball, the possible fallout worries me some. I am more worried that there may be some owners who want to shut down the game when the current collective-bargaining agreement expires to hold out for a salary cap (which would have little effect on competitive balance while increasing profits -- but that isn't the subject of this thread).

In comparison to some of the problems baseball could have, steroids isn't a big deal.

Lip Man 1
02-09-2009, 09:55 PM
Keep in mind that Back In The Day, baseball had a real commissioner who had the authority to do what he thought was best for the game and everyone involved in it.

That's not the case anymore.

Lip

ChiSoxFan81
02-10-2009, 09:55 AM
Regardless of what category of cheating it falls under, it's still a cheat. It's like arguing which type of embezzlement someone engineered.

Regarding throwing a game, well, that might be easier than we think, all things considered. Take a disgruntled reliever making league minimum and put $100k in front of him. Convince me of how impossible a scenario that is.

Basically, the PED users get away with it because no one holds them accountable. If we had a commisioner with any testicular fortitude, he would have taken action long ago. The players union is just as guilty for refusing testing for so long. There were no real consequences until a couple years ago. As unfortunate as it is, known steroid users will be enshrined in the hall of fame. So, you make millions of dollars, break records, get into the HOF, and all because you cheated, and everyone knows it. It's a slap in the face to all the other greats of the game. I couldn't care less what guys did in their personal life, but when you directly affect the game, there should be a line in the sand. Accepting PED users just because "worse has happened" doesn't make sense. That's like excusing corporate criminals because people have stolen more money before. We've been desensitized to the gravity of the situation. Like I've said, if we're going to keep Pete Rose out for betting on his own team to win, then I better not see a Barry Bonds in the HOF. That's hypocrisy at its finest.

doublem23
02-10-2009, 10:15 AM
Keep in mind that Back In The Day, baseball had a real commissioner who had the authority to do what he thought was best for the game and everyone involved in it.

That's not the case anymore.

Lip

Even with the cloud of steroid suspicion hanging over the game the last few years, MLB set records in revenue and attendance last season. If you believe the days when teams routinely struggled to attract 1 million fans to the park are the "glory days," that's fine, but the reality is baseball in 2008 was better than baseball in 1968.

Marqhead
02-10-2009, 10:19 AM
Even with the cloud of steroid suspicion hanging over the game the last few years, MLB set records in revenue and attendance last season. f you believe the days when teams routinely struggled to attract 1 million fans to the park are the "glory days," that's fine, but the reality is baseball in 2008 was better than baseball in 1968.

This is absolutley true. However, it would be nice to have a mixture of both, which surely is possible. Having a league with record attendance and revenues coupled with control of its players and their adherence to league rules and federal laws.

TommyJohn
02-10-2009, 10:44 AM
Even with the cloud of steroid suspicion hanging over the game the last few years, MLB set records in revenue and attendance last season. If you believe the days when teams routinely struggled to attract 1 million fans to the park are the "glory days," that's fine, but the reality is baseball in 2008 was better than baseball in 1968.
Financially speaking, yes and it will continue to be that way. The lifeblood of baseball is the casual fans, who just go to the games and don't give a rip about who is doing what.

TDog
02-10-2009, 11:01 AM
Keep in mind that Back In The Day, baseball had a real commissioner who had the authority to do what he thought was best for the game and everyone involved in it.

That's not the case anymore.

Lip

The game really is better off without such a commissier. I think the ghosts of Josh Gibson and Dickie Kerr would agree.

Lip Man 1
02-10-2009, 06:08 PM
TDog:

So you approve of a "commissioner" who is only interested in the owners point of view and desire to make money?

That's good for the game?

Interesting.

Lip

Daver
02-10-2009, 06:26 PM
TDog:

So you approve of a "commissioner" who is only interested in the owners point of view and desire to make money?

That's good for the game?

Interesting.

Lip

That is not entirely true, Bud's decision to have a full blown steroids investigation was done without the blessing of the owners, but they could not stop it as it was funded with MLB funds, and those funds are distributed at the sole discretion of the commisioner of baseball.

Did the investigation accomplish anything? Perhaps, perhaps not, but it did provide the perception that MLB was taking action, and to many perception is reality.

TDog
02-10-2009, 06:29 PM
TDog:

So you approve of a "commissioner" who is only interested in the owners point of view and desire to make money?

That's good for the game?

Interesting.

Lip

Landis was only interested in the owners' point of view unless it interfered with his selfish point of view, which resulted in some great social injustices that don't end with race restrictions. Ueberroth was only interested in the owners' point of view, to the degree that he knowingly oversaw collusion among baseball owners to maximize their profits while ignoring the ability to improve their teams through free agency. For the most part, commissioners always have been more interested in the owners' point of view although they may in fact have considered the owners' point of view what was good for the game. Landis was hired by the owners, Every subsequent commissioner was hired by the owners. I don't believe the idyllic commissioner you speak of has ever existed in baseball.

Kuhn was the only commissioner to take actions for the good of the game that could be considered anti-owner. But many fans blame him for many of today's problems. Certainly there were many fan and player complaints about Kuhn when he was in office.

EndemicSox
02-12-2009, 12:37 PM
Prepare for angry rant directed at everyone involved in this mess. Sorry for the re-post, but it needs to be said. I'm tired of hearing about this mess too, but something needs to done. :gulp::angry:


I can't believe that these players can get away with what they say in their "apologies", as everything these cheats say is scripted by the union, or MLB, or some PR agency. Then again, ESPN and many media outlets have an interest in making sure MLB/NFL/etc come out of this steroid(notice the players never say this word for some reason) debacle looking as good as they possibly can, so it doesn't surprise me. The ideal end-game for all parties involved/invested in the game seems to be centered upon getting the fans to forget this even happened, and go on allowing players to take whatever is one-step ahead of the testing curve.

It's time to allow a player to either stick as many needles in his ### as he wishes, or implement olympic-style drug testing. This middle ground is a joke. If Selig or Fehr or some mouth-breathing roider would simply come out and say "We condone the use of steroids, because chicks, err television executives love the longball" or "I used them because they helped make me wealthy beyond my wildest dreams and I'd do it again" I'd have more respect for the cheaters. As it stands, this whole debacle is souring me on the game I played and loved as kid, a teen, and even professionally for a few summers. I'm sure Don Fehr and Bud, or Nike or whoever is telling the players what to say is mostly to blame for how ridiculous these turds look in front of the microphone, but come on...grow a sack. Just one of you, don't hide behind your union, be a freaking man...

Legalize everything, or implement Olympic-style testing, it's up to the owners to push hard for one of the two options, because I'm sick and tired of the in-between. When Don Fehr and his band of small-testicled brothers start to whine, tell them to sit on a stick. The current testing program is a joke, don't let the union, A-Rod, ESPN, or anyone with an interest in the game tell you otherwise. If that is what the owners want, so be it...it's their ball and it's their league.

Craig Grebeck
02-12-2009, 12:45 PM
Prepare for angry rant directed at everyone involved in this mess. Sorry for the re-post, but it needs to be said. I'm tired of hearing about this mess too, but something needs to done. :gulp::angry:


I can't believe that these players can get away with what they say in their "apologies", as everything these cheats say is scripted by the union, or MLB, or some PR agency. Then again, ESPN and many media outlets have an interest in making sure MLB/NFL/etc come out of this steroid(notice the players never say this word for some reason) debacle looking as good as they possibly can, so it doesn't surprise me. The ideal end-game for all parties involved/invested in the game seems to be centered upon getting the fans to forget this even happened, and go on allowing players to take whatever is one-step ahead of the testing curve.

It's time to allow a player to either stick as many needles in his ### as he wishes, or implement olympic-style drug testing. This middle ground is a joke. If Selig or Fehr or some mouth-breathing roider would simply come out and say "We condone the use of steroids, because chicks, err television executives love the longball" or "I used them because they helped make me wealthy beyond my wildest dreams and I'd do it again" I'd have more respect for the cheaters. As it stands, this whole debacle is souring me on the game I played and loved as kid, a teen, and even professionally for a few summers. I'm sure Don Fehr and Bud, or Nike or whoever is telling the players what to say is mostly to blame for how ridiculous these turds look in front of the microphone, but come on...grow a sack. Just one of you, don't hide behind your union, be a freaking man...

Legalize everything, or implement Olympic-style testing, it's up to the owners to push hard for one of the two options, because I'm sick and tired of the in-between. When Don Fehr and his band of small-testicled borthers start to whine, tell them to sit on a stick. The current testing program is a joke, don't let the union, A-Rod, ESPN, or anyone with an interest in the game tell you otherwise. If that is what the owners want, so be it...it's their ball and it's their league.
The current program is not an issue. What is wrong with it?

Hendu
02-12-2009, 01:04 PM
The current program is not an issue. What is wrong with it?

Urine tests are very easy to beat, and do not detect HGH. If everyone was serious about cleaning up the game, they'd implement blood testing (while not 100% foolproof, it picks up a lot more than urine tests).

Just take a look at the players who have tested positive since a punishment has been attached to the test. Mostly low-level players, a couple relief pitchers, and a few decent or good players (Palmeiro, Jose Guillen, Cameron). It seems fishy.