PDA

View Full Version : Poll Which was worse for MLB?


SouthSide_HitMen
03-15-2006, 09:20 PM
Pick which of these three events over the past twenty years harmed Major League Baseball and your enjoyment of it the most.

MUsoxfan
03-15-2006, 09:27 PM
Strikes upset me the most. They upset alot of people the most. It took a long time for MLB to get the fans back.

If the MLBPA had gone on strike again a couple years ago, I would have given up on baseball forever. There's nothing I hate more than millionaire athletes crying that they're not being paid enough so much so that they'd all go on strike

1951Campbell
03-15-2006, 09:34 PM
'94.

No contest. What a team that was.

Norberto7
03-15-2006, 09:56 PM
The steroid issue was the worst thing for MLB in my eyes. Such flagrant violation of the rules (or maybe ethics, at least) of the game, all in the name of entertainment, was disappointing, entertaining, and helplessly sickening all at the same time.

Overall, though, it's hard to argue against the strike causing the most damage. Just look, from attendance and interest standpoints, it can be argued (though I'd rather not) that the stike almost killed baseball and steroids saved it.

I'm not a big fan of the "I hate multi-million $$ ballplayers because they strike and they make so much money and how do they need more etc..." arguement. The reason they get paid the money is because that's the value that society places upon them. If they feel someone other than the generators of the revenue (themselves) are getting more than their fair share, then do what you have to do. If two people work together equally for $10 million dollars, and one says to the other, "I'll give you one million", is he not supposed to complain, simply because he's a millionaire? I don't know what the cause of the strike was back then, but simply throwing out "They shouldn't strike because they're millionaires and play a game" doesn't seem fair.

Off topic, but on the subject of labor unions, there was a funny line from a Colbert Report rerun on today along the lines of "Despite getting an entire hockey season cancelled, labor unions aren't always as great as they appear to be." :D:

soxfan26
03-15-2006, 10:05 PM
I voted for steroids strictly based on my personal feelings.

1994 pissed me off but it really only ruined a single season for me. Steroids has called into the question several of the statistics that are my favorite part of the game and exposed several players as disgusting human beings. Add MLB's response and it has the potential to hurt the game worse than the strike.

The Racehorse
03-15-2006, 10:10 PM
For me, 1994 is ancient history. I was living in Fairbanks Alaska at the time. It was pre-internet and following the Sox was somewhat of a detached experience. Today is now, the Sox are 2005 WS champions. I could care less about 1994.


On the other hand, when I listen to people spin on the issue of drugs, that disgusts me.

Rooney4Prez56
03-17-2006, 10:49 AM
Steroids is deliberate cheating that not only affects records, but it affects a team's ability to win. The strike was bad, but steroids are putting a permanent stain on the acheivements of tainted players, while overshadowing the true baseball feats accomplished by the actual baseball players.

pythons007
03-17-2006, 11:06 AM
I picked the one that anything can be done in the game and I would still love it. This is my favorite sport in the world. I played the game into college until I screwed up my arm, in the hopes of maybe getting drafted (my dream). That never happened but I still play softball and love going to White Sox games and just taking in the atmosphere of the game.

Either way you look at it, steroids brought back the fans in 98 with Sosa and McGuire. After the strike in 94, baseball was in a tailspin upuntil the homerun race and chasing 61. No matter what people say, steroids or no steroids that season is what brought back fans to the game. I can't condone what some of these players have done, but I can honestly say, I really don't care. I'm still going to enjoy going the park and watching my team.

There are too many good aspects compared to a couple bad ones to change my mind on how much I love this game. I look forward to each and every season, and each and ever game that I get to go to.

jdm2662
03-17-2006, 11:30 AM
It was a tough choice. Both the 1994 strike and steriods I've been very vocal against. I was so mad after the strike, I didn't watch baseball for five years. I didn't completely end my boycott until 2000. I was totally cheering for the Congress hearings and watching guys like McGwire make a fool out of himself. I was also so happy that Palmerio got busted. The way the PA and MLB felt they were above everyone else about the steriod issue really irked me. When they got exposed, I didn't even care if it meant it was bad for the game. I wanted those frauds exposed to who they are.

With that said, even after this years Series win, I voted for 1994 strike. There were too many good things going on around baseball. There was an awesome Expos team. Tony Gwinn was close to .400. Matt Williams was acutally on pace to break the HR record. All for not. And, let's not forget the White Sox. The strike was the main cause of the setbacks the organzation had in the late 90s.

soxinem1
03-17-2006, 11:58 AM
It was a tough choice. Both the 1994 strike and steriods I've been very vocal against. I was so mad after the strike, I didn't watch baseball for five years. I didn't completely end my boycott until 2000. I was totally cheering for the Congress hearings and watching guys like McGwire make a fool out of himself. I was also so happy that Palmerio got busted. The way the PA and MLB felt they were above everyone else about the steriod issue really irked me. When they got exposed, I didn't even care if it meant it was bad for the game. I wanted those frauds exposed to who they are.

With that said, even after this years Series win, I voted for 1994 strike. There were too many good things going on around baseball. There was an awesome Expos team. Tony Gwinn was close to .400. Matt Williams was acutally on pace to break the HR record. All for not. And, let's not forget the White Sox. The strike was the main cause of the setbacks the organzation had in the late 90s.

I couldn't have said it better. The 1994 White Sox were one of the most balanced teams in their history, from offense, to SP, RP, etc. Almost the entire starting lineup except Karkovice were on track for career years. Hernandez was getting roughed up a little but the entire pen was very effective and had depth. Even though the Sox and Indians were neck and neck, that just might have been the team to go to the playoffs B2B and make the World Series.

And the other baseball stories you mentioned were great too. I was really pushing for Gwynn to hit .400, just to stick it to all those hardline old schoolers who thought their generation was the best at everything.

Since we were expecting my son at the time I had other distractions, but this year left a real sour taste, especially with the crap team Scheuler fielded in 1995. I remember all the spoiled millionaires stating they were striking for 'future players'.

So without question, this was the worst baseball experience in my view.

kevin57
03-17-2006, 12:34 PM
This is a good poll; made me think. I was tempted to check "All of the above," but I usually avoid that option because it's kind of a cop-out.

That said, I chose the steroid scandal. Reasons:

1. The '94 strike was painful as a Sox fan and it took baseball years to overcome; however, it did not strike (no pun intended) at the essential integrity of the game. Steroids do. Unless something is done, baseball's stats and records will be suspect in perpetuam.

2. The Rose scandal was a black eye, but at least baseball dealt with it in a definitive manner. The new steroids policy is a step up but the unwillingness to confront Bonds, Sosa, et al. anything like Rose makes this a greater scandal.

WhiteSoxFan84
03-17-2006, 12:54 PM
A missed World Series is one thing, but your top players of the past 10+ years being fakes and cheating? That's horrific.

PaulDrake
03-17-2006, 01:04 PM
A missed World Series is one thing, but your top players of the past 10+ years being fakes and cheating? That's horrific. Don't even try. That's old fashioned out of touch thinking around here.

SouthSide_HitMen
03-18-2006, 02:48 AM
A missed World Series is one thing, but your top players of the past 10+ years being fakes and cheating? That's horrific.

We will have to see how this all plays out but Bud and Jerry certainly rather have the steroids than 1994. Baseball lost a lot of money and a lot of fans for years after the strike. Meanwhile, the White Sox and several other teams have record attendance and record income during this latest baseball scandal. 20 years of incompetence regarding the drug and steroid issue hasn't hurt the game as far as fan interest goes. In fact, steroids led to the resurgence in fan interest post 1994 which has only grown.

I haven't seen any outcry of fans saying "we will boycott games until this issue is dealt with in a legitimate manner" even though juicers effected the World Series since 1988 and home run records since 1998 and in 2006 MLB is STILL not testing for Human Growth Hormone type steroids and other PEDs which can only be detected via blood tests.

Millions of fans stopped going to ball games after 1994. I did not return to Comiskey until 1999 post strike. There are thousands more like me who didn't start returning to the ballpark until the last several years after one, two or several years away from the ballpark.

Twice as many fans here think 1994 was worse. I would think White Sox fans would have a higher majority (vs. fans of other teams except Montreal) based on our lost chance at the World Series during the owners hard line stance for a salary cap and the players fighting and beating ownership once again. Unfortunately, fans are the biggest losers. Owners will raise the prices (or obtain billions in corporate welfare) when they can and the players will find a way to get their share of the additional money.

PaleHoseGeorge
03-18-2006, 05:19 AM
A missed World Series is one thing, but your top players of the past 10+ years being fakes and cheating? That's horrific. Don't even try. That's old fashioned out of touch thinking around here.
Exactly. We could turn baseball into a carny freak show the likes of bodybuilding competitions and professional wrestling, but that's okay. Just don't deprive us of our World Series?

:o:

Lots of people still don't understand how big this scandal is. That's all this poll proves.

soxfanatlanta
03-18-2006, 10:32 PM
Exactly. We could turn baseball into a carny freak show the likes of bodybuilding competitions and professional wrestling, but that's okay. Just don't deprive us of our World Series?

:o:

Lots of people still don't understand how big this scandal is. That's all this poll proves.
It was not the cancellation of the world series that pissed me off, it was the hundreds of games that were never played. It was the millionaires weeping about being underpaid by billionaires, it was the complete bitch slap I got seeing how horribly mismanaged this game (that I love dearly) was by both sides. Are the problems still there? Yep. Will they be solved? Well, if they are not, then the game will no longer exist in 100 years.

To the steroid point: If the game was won by muscle alone, then yes; our 9 spot hitter would be Scott Stiener:tongue:. But fortunately it is not; you need hand-eye coordination, speed, agility, etc...

Roids, and hormones are a serious problem that will never go away now; as long as somebody is willing to use a syringe to get better, there will be a BALCO waiting in a gym somewhere. The recent policy is a beginning of a cat and mouse game seen in every other major sport where $$ is flying around.

Though of the day. Look at the roids epidemic, and look at how badly it is being dealt with. Then look at the 94 strike; how both sides mismanaged the labor bargaining the to point of extinction. The two are related, not just cause and effect; but they both came from a fundamental flaw in the business of baseball.

SouthSide_HitMen
03-18-2006, 10:35 PM
Look at the roids epidemic, and look at how badly it is being dealt with. Then look at the 94 strike; how both sides mismanaged the labor bargaining the to point of extinction. The two are related, not just cause and effect; but they both came from a fundamental flaw in the business of baseball.

http://www.cnnsi.com/baseball/2002/allstar/news/2002/07/09/allstar_game_ap/t1_selig_ap.jpg

You rang?

PaleHoseGeorge
03-19-2006, 08:24 AM
It was not the cancellation of the world series that pissed me off, it was the hundreds of games that were never played. It was the millionaires weeping about being underpaid by billionaires, it was the complete bitch slap I got seeing how horribly mismanaged this game (that I love dearly) was by both sides. Are the problems still there? Yep. Will they be solved? Well, if they are not, then the game will no longer exist in 100 years.

Yep, I was right. I wrote this...
We could turn baseball into a carny freak show the likes of bodybuilding competitions and professional wrestling, but that's okay. Just don't deprive us of our World Series?

And you wrote that...
It was not the cancellation of the world series that pissed me off, it was the hundreds of games that were never played. It was the millionaires weeping about being underpaid by billionaires, it was the complete bitch slap I got seeing how horribly mismanaged this game (that I love dearly) was by both sides.


We're in complete agreement. I'm just surprised anyone would jump with both feet right into it.
:cool:

SoxEd
03-19-2006, 08:27 AM
Drug cheats destroy the integrity of the game, the validity of the Stats that underpin it all, and remove any admiration that one can feel for the supposed ability or talent that a juiced 'athlete' has.

If you admire the juicers, then I assume you also admire the 'athletes' of Communist East Germany as having been unquestionably the best in the World.

Widespread Drug cheating means that other peple have to juice, just to keep up, or to hope of ever making it to 'the Show', including High School kids.

Steroids have already killed High School kids.

The Strike exposed the fact that MLB & the MLBPA have no greater organisational abilities or 'love for the game' (or general nous) than other 'genius' organisations such as UEFA or the FIA.

But - the Strike killed NO kids.

End of story.

Pete Rose?
Exposed himself as a cheat and a liar, and all-around general numpty.
Killed any kids?
I think not.

What is so 'complicated', or 'difficult to understand' about this issue?
:?:

Scottiehaswheels
03-19-2006, 08:57 AM
Might I suggest for the poll to be expanded to include Selig being appointed commish and the AL East owners spending up to 5x other teams or the inverse; teams like KC/TB spending 1/5 what the Yanks/Carmines do

FarWestChicago
03-19-2006, 10:15 AM
Might I suggest for the poll to be expanded to include Selig being appointed commish and the AL East owners spending up to 5x other teams or the inverse; teams like KC/TB spending 1/5 what the Yanks/Carmines doNo.

soxfanatlanta
03-19-2006, 10:24 AM
Might I suggest for the poll to be expanded to include Selig being appointed commish and the AL East owners spending up to 5x other teams or the inverse; teams like KC/TB spending 1/5 what the Yanks/Carmines do
I would add The Federal Baseball case of 1922 allowing MLB to be a monopoly.

PaulDrake
03-19-2006, 10:37 AM
Great eloquent work by PHG and our British friend Sox Ed. The world has changed and people just view things differently now. Old school is truly old hat. Too bad.

PaleHoseGeorge
03-19-2006, 10:40 AM
Wow, what a shame. The replies to this poll just keep getting sadder and sadder.

Sportsmanship, substance abuse, and the law. These three concepts obviously lie beyond the understanding of a large number of fans.

:(:

Railsplitter
03-19-2006, 01:32 PM
The Drugs, no contest.

Funny how athletes are the only employees blamed in labor disputes. It's never the team owners.

As for Pete Rose betting on baseball, has anybody ever said "I'm not watching baseball any more because Pete Rose bet on some games." ?

Scottiehaswheels
03-19-2006, 02:03 PM
My responses were in line with which harms MLB the greatest.... You don't think having 4-5 completely non-competive teams in each league a year doesn't hurt baseball? Why the talk of contraction then? Contraction of teams doesn't hurt MLB's image?

and for my Bud Selig statement... This guy had to get MLB dragged into federal court to get a drug policy established... That doesn't hurt MLB's image? Selig dances around the issues affecting the game directly... I must admit I like the WBC and interleague but other than that he hasn't really helped the game much at all... Where was he demanding a testing policy before Congress did? MLB looks foolish when the government has to establish rules for them to follow and can't clean up their own act

I mean come on... when most of the country views Congress as incompetent(not trying to get political just saying) and Congress has to clear up baseball... what does that say to the public about MLB's competence to monitor itself to the public?

I guess what I'm tryin to say is that I think fans are more upset about MLB just FINALLY enacting a penalty system for cheaters than it is about people actually cheating... If the policy were enacted 4-5 years ago would Bonds even be an issue right now? no

soxfanatlanta
03-19-2006, 08:03 PM
My responses were in line with which harms MLB the greatest.... You don't think having 4-5 completely non-competive teams in each league a year doesn't hurt baseball? Why the talk of contraction then? Contraction of teams doesn't hurt MLB's image?


This is a twisted point of view, but look at it from an owner's perspective; the league is making more money now then ever - even the non-competitive teams gleefully take the revenue sharing checks and disperse the funds in any way they see fit. Many of the losing teams frequently do a payroll dump just for the welfare checks :smile: (see KC). Then through the magic of accounting, they transfer revenues from the team to their cable companies, and claim poverty.

That's the business of baseball, isn't it grand?

About contraction: Ain't gonna happen - see Ol No 2's reasons, he's right on the mark.

SoxSpeed22
03-19-2006, 08:19 PM
The strike of '94 did more than end one season.
It turned fans off from the game, revenues dropped.
Players became much whinier about money and wanting to be traded after that.
Most importantly, I believe that it also opened the door for the steroid scandals. Fans like home runs and high-scoring games, if a bunch of juiced players hit home runs, that's more fans and more money for us. I also think that there were a lot of people who lied at that grand jury. It also wouldn't surprise me if the higher-ups knew about the drugs.
The steroid is a terrible thing for the game, there's no question. There were frauds and "tainted records", and Satan created steroids according to Ol No. 2. It still would have happened, but it would have been much less severe if there was no strike.