PDA

View Full Version : SELIG needs to GO


SoLongFrank
04-07-2006, 01:34 PM
The more I read about the years leading up to the strike in 1994 & the years following it I'm convinced he new about the problem, had public opinion on his side, & choose to ignore it.

The first by MLB was in 1991 clearly defining as a rule of conduct that steroids & & long-term body altering performance enhancers were illegal.

In 1994 that rule was strengthened. The union never challenged either rule because no team flagged a player for violating it.

Then we have the strike season. Some owners (JR) took a lot of the heat but the MLBPA took a beating as well.

There's simply no reason to believe that Selig could not have gotten drug testing into the CBA as early as the 1995 season. Had Selig made it an issue in 1994-1995 he would have shifted public opinion against the union.

It's just common sense. 1994 is shutdown by a strike. Public opinion favors the players over the owners. Had Selig made it an issue by suggesting the union was threatening the integrity of the game it's a given public opinion would have shifted in favor of the owners.

Furthermore, the letter states they didn't start cleaning up the minor leagues until 2001. The MLBPA has no say over the minor league's so why did it wait 10 yrs after Vincent's first ruling on the matter?

I'm interested in hearing arguments defending MLB, MLBPA, & Selig in general. In my opinion Selig's attempt to suggest this is a BALCO scandal or a Barry scandal is nonsense.

We are talking about a scandal that started as early as 1991 & took 10 yrs before MLB did anything about it. If not for a reporter spotting Andro in Mark's locker it probably would have taken longer than that.

The truth is that MLB & the MLBPA intended to perpetuate this type of game indefinitely. It took Jose Canseco, Caminiti's death, & several reporters to change their minds.

When a scandal of this magnitude shakes the integrity of a sport the top man must go.

Trav
04-07-2006, 01:53 PM
There is a reason why he choose not to have an independent investigation. Anything that leads to him or an owner will be brushed over and covered up even more.

tebman
04-07-2006, 02:09 PM
I'm interested in hearing arguments defending MLB, MLBPA, & Selig in general. In my opinion Selig's attempt to suggest this is a BALCO scandal or a Barry scandal is nonsense.

We are talking about a scandal that started as early as 1991 & took 10 yrs before MLB did anything about it. If not for a reporter spotting Andro in Mark's locker it probably would have taken longer than that.
I don't intend to defend Selig, but it might come off that way. I don't think Selig and his brain trust are as much conspiratorial as they are clueless. Does that excuse him? Certainly not, but since the earliest days of the game the owners have never been accused of being rocket scientists. Hard businessmen, sure, but not insightful or visionary.

I don't doubt that somebody in the Commissioner's palatial used-car office was talking about drug possibilities over the last several years. But my guess is that Selig was distracted by something more interesting, the way a cat is distracted by a dangling string.

I don't think malfeasance is going to injure the game, but stupidity probably will.

SoLongFrank
04-07-2006, 02:11 PM
The government's involvement in all this is unscathed as well. Anderson & Conte? They didn't even serve ONE YEAR in prison!

The first thing Conte states when he's released is that Game of Shadows is full of crap & I will prove it. Stay tuned.

Translation: Wait for my book release to counter GoS so that I can make more off of that then I ever did off BALCO.

What about the old WWF & the new WWE? Did any one see the death rate under McMahon's watch? Why hasn't the goverment regulated professional wrestling?

Most of us believe that it's best for private companies to police themselves when it comes to federal & state laws. But when the evidence is overwhelming that a company/sector is NOT capable of doing that it should then be subjected to regulation.

Yet where is the congressional investigation for the WWE & it's death rate?
How many high school athletes are there out there idolizing WWE stars? What kind of an impact did McMahon's legacy have on the youth of America? Why do 5 million people a week still watch that crap?

SoLongFrank
04-07-2006, 02:13 PM
I don't intend to defend Selig, but it might come off that way. I don't think Selig and his brain trust are as much conspiratorial as they are clueless. Does that excuse him? Certainly not, but since the earliest days of the game the owners have never been accused of being rocket scientists. Hard businessmen, sure, but not insightful or visionary.

I don't doubt that somebody in the Commissioner's palatial used-car office was talking about drug possibilities over the last several years. But my guess is that Selig was distracted by something more interesting, the way a cat is distracted by a dangling string.

I don't think malfeasance is going to injure the game, but stupidity probably will.

Nice try but that's easily shot down by the 1991 & 1994 memo's from the commissioner's office. If they didn't smell something fishy then why was there a need to strengthen the policy?

tebman
04-07-2006, 02:18 PM
Nice try but that's easily shot down by the 1991 & 1994 memo's from the commissioner's office. If they didn't smell something fishy then why was there a need to strengthen the policy?
Good point. Maybe the lack of any real action after those memos were issued demonstrates stupid malfeasance. Or maybe malfeasant stupidity.

Either way, I agree with your premise. Selig's got to go.

Flight #24
04-07-2006, 02:24 PM
There's simply no reason to believe that Selig could not have gotten drug testing into the CBA as early as the 1995 season. Had Selig made it an issue in 1994-1995 he would have shifted public opinion against the union.

It's just common sense. 1994 is shutdown by a strike. Public opinion favors the players over the owners. Had Selig made it an issue by suggesting the union was threatening the integrity of the game it's a given public opinion would have shifted in favor of the owners.


I disagree with 2 major things here:
1)Steroids were not that big a deal in the public eye, even though they were rumored, back in the early 90s. It was only in the past 5-8 years that they've become a big deal publicly

2)Had Bud made steroids an issue in the 90s, there would have been even greater fights with the MLBPA. Even now, with public support 100% against them, the union is resisting wich comments like if the MLB tries to suspend Bonds, they'll take them to arbitration. Back in '94, had the owners made it a big deal it would only have ensured either a much longer strike, or a CBA with drug testing but no luxury tax (as an example).

IMO they knew, or at least suspected. But it wasn't a battle they could win with the MLBPA at the time, and they had bigger fish to fry. Now, they have some financial controls in place and far greater public support, making it a fightable and winnable battle with the union.

SoLongFrank
04-07-2006, 02:52 PM
Steroids weren't that big of a deal because the media didn't see a story. After the 1994 was cut short by the strike Selig could have made it a story.

I disagree with your assessment of power in the MLBPA. I think any issue that threatens the integrity of the game always sways public opinion.

Let's not forget the Pete Rose thing was big at that time. Fans saw first hand in the Black Sox scandal how gambling can threaten the integrity of the game.

We have also witnessed the NHL shutdown an entire season to receive leverage against that union. I think JR in particular was prepared to do that.

Ol' No. 2
04-07-2006, 03:49 PM
I disagree with 2 major things here:
1)Steroids were not that big a deal in the public eye, even though they were rumored, back in the early 90s. It was only in the past 5-8 years that they've become a big deal publicly

2)Had Bud made steroids an issue in the 90s, there would have been even greater fights with the MLBPA. Even now, with public support 100% against them, the union is resisting wich comments like if the MLB tries to suspend Bonds, they'll take them to arbitration. Back in '94, had the owners made it a big deal it would only have ensured either a much longer strike, or a CBA with drug testing but no luxury tax (as an example).

IMO they knew, or at least suspected. But it wasn't a battle they could win with the MLBPA at the time, and they had bigger fish to fry. Now, they have some financial controls in place and far greater public support, making it a fightable and winnable battle with the union.In the first few post-strike years, baseball attendance was way down and the owners were crapping their pants. Suddenly, McGwire and Sosa started hitting dingers and "saved baseball". Attendance rebounded, and there's no way in hell MLB was going to screw up a good thing by launching an investigation into what most people who really follow baseball knew was going on.

That same year, Steve Wilstein blew the whistle on McGwire's andro use and was almost banished from baseball. LaRussa tried to ban him from the clubhouse. The other writers took note and nobody mentioned the subject again. This was no accident. It was part of a concerted effort by MLB to shush any mention of steroids. But you can't keep the lid on forever, and once the story became a big deal, Selig did an about face (at least publicly). Once he could no longer keep the train from leaving the station, he hopped on board and pretended to be driving. But the limitations put on the current "investigation" reveal the true intentions.

The MLBPA wasn't any more stubborn 10 years ago than they are now. There's no reason MLB couldn't have initiated an investigation if they wanted to do so.

Flight #24
04-07-2006, 04:20 PM
The MLBPA wasn't any more stubborn 10 years ago than they are now. There's no reason MLB couldn't have initiated an investigation if they wanted to do so.
IMO there wouldn't have been the public support for it back then. It was pretty obvious that Sosa, etc had done something but it wasn't really a major issue. Even when McGwire's andro came out, it wasn't considered that big a deal despite the obvious link to steroids use.

Lack of public support = another defeat of the owners by the union. Of course, the same lack of public support led them to decide that it was better to have the HRs and the publicity than investigate with questionable backing. But IMO it was certainly a factor that the result of the investigation wouldn't have been as easily turned into policy as it would now.

Ol' No. 2
04-07-2006, 04:42 PM
IMO there wouldn't have been the public support for it back then. It was pretty obvious that Sosa, etc had done something but it wasn't really a major issue. Even when McGwire's andro came out, it wasn't considered that big a deal despite the obvious link to steroids use.

Lack of public support = another defeat of the owners by the union. Of course, the same lack of public support led them to decide that it was better to have the HRs and the publicity than investigate with questionable backing. But IMO it was certainly a factor that the result of the investigation wouldn't have been as easily turned into policy as it would now.When Wilstein's story first broke there was a lot of interest, since most everyone understood what was happening. There wasn't public support because MLB pulled out all the stops to kill the story.

Lip Man 1
04-07-2006, 06:48 PM
Breaking News:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2400884

Bad news for Sheffied. And don't think for a nanosecond that George Steinbrenner is going to sit idely by while a member of the Red Sox board of directors is 'investigating' two of his players.

This has all the makings of one monster lawsuit / courtcase.

Selig should have handled this himself in the mid 90's (but of course he didn't want to needing the home runs to help bring baseball back from the brink. A brink caused by folks like him, Reinsdorf, Pohland and others who foolishly thought they were going to 'break' the MLBPA)

Lip

SouthSide_HitMen
04-07-2006, 06:54 PM
We are talking about a scandal that started as early as 1991 & took 10 yrs before MLB did anything about it.

For all you youngsters out there, the problem started in the eighties and was publically discussed and reported. The first "major" steroid discussion occurred during the Bash Brothers World Series in 1988 when LaRussa's heavily favored (and juiced) team choked yet again, this time to a two man team consisting of a cripple (Gibson) and Hershiser.

Trav
04-10-2006, 10:06 AM
I don't intend to defend Selig, but it might come off that way. I don't think Selig and his brain trust are as much conspiratorial as they are clueless. Does that excuse him? Certainly not, but since the earliest days of the game the owners have never been accused of being rocket scientists. Hard businessmen, sure, but not insightful or visionary.

I don't doubt that somebody in the Commissioner's palatial used-car office was talking about drug possibilities over the last several years. But my guess is that Selig was distracted by something more interesting, the way a cat is distracted by a dangling string.

I don't think malfeasance is going to injure the game, but stupidity probably will.

I can't dissagree with you more. Selig is a very smart man. He has pretty much instituted every agenda that he has cooked up. He has made the owners a ton of money. He was able to black mail city after city into building a new stadium where one wasn't needed. He is very smart. But that doesn't mean that he needs to stay.

Rooney4Prez56
04-10-2006, 01:07 PM
The truth is that MLB & the MLBPA intended to perpetuate this type of game indefinitely. It took Jose Canseco, Caminiti's death, & several reporters to change their minds.


If someone on the juice wasn't chasing one of the most sacred records in sports, MLB would still be perpetuating this type of game.

MLB dropped the ball, and they will have a scar forever. Selig should go, if only to stop the bleeding.

bigfoot
04-12-2006, 05:38 AM
Aren't we all missing the obvious link to the steroid investigation? The US Congress holds MLB by the short-hairs with the anti-trust legislation.
As soon as a couple of Congressmen decided to make political hay, in the forum of public opinion out of steroid allegations, the MLBPA was on the weaker side of the arguement, THEN Bud got tough.

Before this Bud was busy denouncing Canseco's book and most other allegations, that didn't have a trial involved.

Trav
04-12-2006, 08:49 AM
Aren't we all missing the obvious link to the steroid investigation? The US Congress holds MLB by the short-hairs with the anti-trust legislation.
As soon as a couple of Congressmen decided to make political hay, in the forum of public opinion out of steroid allegations, the MLBPA was on the weaker side of the arguement, THEN Bud got tough.

Before this Bud was busy denouncing Canseco's book and most other allegations, that didn't have a trial involved.

Good point. If the situation was different and Congress hadn't said anything about it then Selig would be hyping up "The Chase" just like he allowed 1998 to get as much pub as possible and just like he authorized a full page congrats to Raffy in the USA Today.

Hangar18
04-12-2006, 09:09 AM
Aren't we all missing the obvious link to the steroid investigation? The US Congress holds MLB by the short-hairs with the anti-trust legislation.
As soon as a couple of Congressmen decided to make political hay, in the forum of public opinion out of steroid allegations, the MLBPA was on the weaker side of the arguement, THEN Bud got tough.

Before this Bud was busy denouncing Canseco's book and most other allegations, that didn't have a trial involved.


Yup. I remember that smug look on his face, he was patting himself on the back, taking credit for the "home-run race" and how it was saving baseball, attendance was up (Mr. Selig didnt realize that just the year before, Wrigley got 2,100,000 sheep to watch a 94 loss team! hahahaahhahaa) physically pointing out the "fans" who were packing the parks to watch the homeruns (mind you, it was wrigley and busch, 2 parks that will be filled no matter what), patting himself on the back taking credit for the "new rivalry" that was created with his brewers and the cubs. Thats what he was busy with ............ looking out for himself.

SoLongFrank
04-12-2006, 02:58 PM
I just finished reading 3 articles that convince me that Bud & Fehr still don't get it. They are trying to go about business as usual & use Bonds as a magnet for the dirt.

What they don't get is that the average fan is no longer as nieve as they want him to be. We no longer read an article stating Eric Chavez worked his butt off & added 25 pds to his frame as something legitimate or a product soley of hard work.

Eric Chavez played 53 games in 2005 before hitting his 5th home. This year he hit that mark after less than two weeks in baseball.

Speaking as a fan who was fooled & did believe that these players were bulking up from legitimate science & hard work I want a practical policy.

This is not about a court of law. This is about the integrity of the game. It's not a question of innocent until proven guilty. It's about practical vs impractical.

Chavez is not alone. There are several players on pace for well above average leaps in homers. Again I shudder to think of what will happen if A-Rod grows envious.

What I advocate is a common sense policy that is actually designed to catch the cheaters. This is more important than an investigation into Bonds & Balco. Any player who adds more than 15 pds of muscle weight in an off-season should not only be tested more often but also subject to blood testing for HGH & the like.

Off-season testing for all players say in early Jan is probably not realistic. But there should be no reason for MLB not to take muscle weight measurements of the players by that time & test those who growth would be classified as extra-ordinary.

The days of saying, "Wow! Chavez worked his ass-off this off-season" are over. They've been replaced with "How is that possible? He must be juiced."

If Selig isn't willing to face this new reality about his sport he's got to go.

Ol' No. 2
04-12-2006, 03:27 PM
I just finished reading 3 articles that convince me that Bud & Fehr still don't get it. They are trying to go about business as usual & use Bonds as a magnet for the dirt.

What they don't get is that the average fan is no longer as nieve as they want him to be. We no longer read an article stating Eric Chavez worked his butt off & added 25 pds to his frame as something legitimate or a product soley of hard work.

Eric Chavez played 53 games in 2005 before hitting his 5th home. This year he hit that mark after less than two weeks in baseball.

Speaking as a fan who was fooled & did believe that these players were bulking up from legitimate science & hard work I want a practical policy.

This is not about a court of law. This is about the integrity of the game. It's not a question of innocent until proven guilty. It's about practical vs impractical.

Chavez is not alone. There are several players on pace for well above average leaps in homers. Again I shudder to think of what will happen if A-Rod grows envious.

What I advocate is a common sense policy that is actually designed to catch the cheaters. This is more important than an investigation into Bonds & Balco. Any player who adds more than 15 pds of muscle weight in an off-season should not only be tested more often but also subject to blood testing for HGH & the like.

Off-season testing for all players say in early Jan is probably not realistic. But there should be no reason for MLB not to take muscle weight measurements of the players by that time & test those who growth would be classified as extra-ordinary.

The days of saying, "Wow! Chavez worked his ass-off this off-season" are over. They've been replaced with "How is that possible? He must be juiced."

If Selig isn't willing to face this new reality about his sport he's got to go.:tool But nobody has tested positive this year. See? My policy is working.