PDA

View Full Version : Hank Steinbrenner needs to shut up!


DumpJerry
02-19-2008, 11:22 AM
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7814346/Hank-Steinbrenner:-Baseball-unfairly-singled-out?MSNHPHMA

Baseball is being singled out for steroids and the NFL gets away with it? What is wrong with this idiot? Is he 7 years old and is complaining about getting punished for something his brother also did but got away with?

Hank, get a clue: even if the NFL had a steriod problem, it does not excuse MLB.

ComiskeyBrewer
02-19-2008, 11:32 AM
I don't think it's as easy to see(no real numbers like a jump in HRs in baseball), but i do think Football has a steroid problem. To me, the problem is that it's not a big deal in football to be found guilty of steroid use(yes, there is a policy in place, but it's viewed as not a big deal to the fans/media). Hell, the defensive player of the year got caught and nobody really batted an eye. He even won the award that year! Now, that being said, i agree that just because there are steroid problems in football, doesn't excuse baseball in the least.

goofymsfan
02-19-2008, 11:35 AM
People need to think before they speak for they only end up looking the fool.

Hank is an idiot!

doublem23
02-19-2008, 11:37 AM
I don't know if he's excusing the MLB for it's steroids problem, but you have to admit there has been a double standard in the way sports media have handled the scandals in each league respectively. Baseball has been "tainted" and there have been serious debates about throwing asterisks in record books, while the NFL last year named a guy who had been suspended 4 games for testing postive for steroids its Defensive Player of the Year. Can you imagine what would happen if A-Rod ever tested positive? He could hit .400, win the Triple Crown, and hit a game-winning grand slam in the bottom of the 9th inning to win the World Series and he wouldn't even sniff an award.

ESPN knows not to bite the hand that feeds it.

DumpJerry
02-19-2008, 11:43 AM
I remember reading a Sports Illustrated article back in the 1970's which went into detail about steroids in the NFL. Then there were those Lyle Alzado ads where he was dying from a brain tumor cause by his use of steroids where he implored the youth of America to stay off the stuff.

I think Hank's fire was misplaced because unlike MLB, the NFL did not even try to deny it was going on. Also, the fact that the Yankees were mentioned so prominently in the Mitchell Report makes is seem disingenuous of him to whine.

Blueprint1
02-19-2008, 11:44 AM
I think he has a valid point here. How many NFL players are on HGH right now? I bet at least half the league takes HGH. The NFL is given a free pass on this issue. MLB and the NFL need to clean up their leagues. The NFL should not get a free pass.

doublem23
02-19-2008, 11:47 AM
I think Hank's fire was misplaced because unlike MLB, the NFL did not even try to deny it was going on. Also, the fact that the Yankees were mentioned so prominently in the Mitchell Report makes is seem disingenuous of him to whine.

I'll agree with that, and I'm not accusing the NFL of being sinister and trying to keep it's dirty little secrets swept under a rug, I think a lot of the blame in this case rests on the hands of so-called sports "journalists" who have no problem throwing baseball under the bus while proclaiming football "the greatest sport ever played." You can't remain objective and have it both ways. Baseball is at fault for the way its administration handled the scandal from Day 1, but if steroids are cheating in baseball, they are cheating in football.

FedEx227
02-19-2008, 12:03 PM
I don't know if he's excusing the MLB for it's steroids problem, but you have to admit there has been a double standard in the way sports media have handled the scandals in each league respectively. Baseball has been "tainted" and there have been serious debates about throwing asterisks in record books, while the NFL last year named a guy who had been suspended 4 games for testing postive for steroids its Defensive Player of the Year. Can you imagine what would happen if A-Rod ever tested positive? He could hit .400, win the Triple Crown, and hit a game-winning grand slam in the bottom of the 9th inning to win the World Series and he wouldn't even sniff an award.

ESPN knows not to bite the hand that feeds it.

Took the words out of my mouth.

Case in point Shawn Merriman. Thats all you need to know about the double-standard of steroids between NFL/MLB.

(Obviously, not excusing either.)

ksimpson14
02-19-2008, 12:16 PM
Kudos to Hank, completely agree, and I'm glad someone who gets attention said it. Considering football is considered the #1 sport, and they were being applauded, it's a joke if their real purpose was 'thinking of the youth'. Every professional sport in the world has this problem. It helps all of them.

ksimpson14
02-19-2008, 12:17 PM
I think he has a valid point here. How many NFL players are on HGH right now? I bet at least half the league takes HGH. The NFL is given a free pass on this issue. MLB and the NFL need to clean up their leagues. The NFL should not get a free pass.

I would say MUCH more than that, and I would guess the steroid roots go even deeper

captainclutch24
02-19-2008, 01:28 PM
Took the words out of my mouth.

Case in point Shawn Merriman. Thats all you need to know about the double-standard of steroids between NFL/MLB.

(Obviously, not excusing either.)

I believe they did change that so it is no longer possible. The NFL has a much stricter drug policy than MLB.

4 Games minimum is the first for steroids
8 games minimum is the next
3rd is a minimum of a year, with reinstatement at the Commisioners discression. Look at the case of Odell Thurman, he was suspended for two seasons for a failed drug test or failure to take a drug test, a DUI, and an assault charge that was dropped because of lack of evidence and conflicting witness reports.

The NFL is a lot stricter with all of their policies than MLB is. Trust me, once there is a test for HGH that does not involve blood drawing, then the NFL will adopt it and start suspending for it.

By the way Shawne Merriman has passed 19 of 20 tests since entering the league.

spawn
02-19-2008, 01:46 PM
Took the words out of my mouth.

Case in point Shawn Merriman. Thats all you need to know about the double-standard of steroids between NFL/MLB.

(Obviously, not excusing either.)
See, I disagree. The reason baseball is getting such a hit right now is because there steroid policy has only been in place for what, 3 years? How long has the NFL had theirs in place? Shawn Merriman violated the drug policy and served I think a 4 game suspension. Mike Cameron will be serving a 25 game suspension. I'd bet money there will be no Congressional hearing when he gets back.

Another thing: The NFL proactively took steps to implement their drug policy. The MLB and the Players Union fought it tooth and nail. Baseball also is seeing records fall because of possible steroid use, and with the MLB, records are sacred. What records in the NFl have fallen that could be attributed to steroid use?

Let's face it. The MLB and the Players union have no one to blame for this but themselves. Hank needs to ****.

FedEx227
02-19-2008, 02:01 PM
We aren't talking about the actual leagues though. What doublem and I are referring to are the way they are covered and perceived by the public/media.

Albert Pujols doesn't lose 25 games for steroids, come back and hit .356 the rest of the year and get an MVP award and have it never be mentioned again. It wouldn't happen.

spawn
02-19-2008, 02:34 PM
We aren't talking about the actual leagues though. What doublem and I are referring to are the way they are covered and perceived by the public/media.

Albert Pujols doesn't lose 25 games for steroids, come back and hit .356 the rest of the year and get an MVP award and have it never be mentioned again. It wouldn't happen.
The NFL corrected itself regarding a player suspended for steroids winning the MVP. They didn't need a Congressional hearing to do so. It was a situation that had never come to light before, and I think they handled it well. Like I said, the reason it's such a big deal is because of how baseball treated the topic of performance enhancing drugs. They pretended there wasn't a problem with it. I'd bet money if the NFL would've reacted the same way, the repercussions would be the same. Once baseball has cleaned itself up and the players of the "steroid era" are no longer active, it won't be as big a deal.

FedEx227
02-19-2008, 02:37 PM
The NFL corrected itself regarding a player suspended for steroids winning the MVP. They didn't need a Congressional hearing to do so. it was a situation that had never come to light before, and I think they handled it well. Like I said, the reason it's such a big deal is because of how baseball treated the topic of performance enhancing drugs. They pretended there wasn't a problem with it. I'd bet money if the NFL would've reacted the same way, the repercussions would be the same. Once baseball has cleaned itself up and the players of the "steroid era" are no longer active, it won't be as big a deal.

It's not strange to you that Merriman came back from his 4-game suspension, then proceeded to win Defensive Player of the Year and didn't get even the slightly amount of coverage from ESPN?

Trust me, the ESPN knows who makes them the most money.

spawn
02-19-2008, 02:42 PM
It's not strange to you that Merriman came back from his 4-game suspension, then proceeded to win Defensive Player of the Year and didn't get even the slightly amount of coverage from ESPN?

I don't find it strange at all. Like I said, this was a unique circumstance that the NFL handled well. It only took for it to happen once before a rule was implemented to prevent it from happening again. Football has been able to govern itself with regards to PHD's without outside interference. The same can't be said for baseball.

Soxfest
02-19-2008, 02:46 PM
Hank is someone who won the lucky sperm club he could not even work fast food and what an ass he his.

Jjav829
02-19-2008, 04:32 PM
I love this quote. What is he, a fan on a message board?

"Everybody that knows sports knows football is tailor-made for performance-enhancing drugs."

Really? Really? Did he really just say "everybody that knows sports?"

misty60481
02-19-2008, 05:19 PM
Pettitte confirmed he used human growth hormone in 2002; two weeks ago, he told congressional investigators he also used HGH for one day in 2004.

I know I m not very smart about steroids and HGH but can using HGH one day make any difference ? I ve seen pictures of Sosa and Fathead and they sure look like they took it more than one day. What I dont understand is can it give you a big lift for just one day ?

SoxyStu
02-19-2008, 05:39 PM
Pettitte confirmed he used human growth hormone in 2002; two weeks ago, he told congressional investigators he also used HGH for one day in 2004.

I know I m not very smart about steroids and HGH but can using HGH one day make any difference ? I ve seen pictures of Sosa and Fathead and they sure look like they took it more than one day. What I dont understand is can it give you a big lift for just one day ?

I don't believe studies are complete to answer your question. I have read that HGH helps the body retain water, which could be confusing users into thinking he/she has gained muscle mass. Other articles that I have read state a very nice muscle mass gain in patients. The hormone does reduce fat mass, though, I believe that's been proven.

misty60481
02-19-2008, 08:54 PM
I can understand over a period of time gaining muscle, but if Pettite only took it for one day what good would it do. I had pneumonia(sp) about 4 years ago and the doctor gave me some steroids but I had to take them for a week, they worked. I dont understand the reasoning behind Pettites saying he took them for one day in 2004.

FedEx227
02-19-2008, 09:01 PM
I don't believe studies are complete to answer your question. I have read that HGH helps the body retain water, which could be confusing users into thinking he/she has gained muscle mass. Other articles that I have read state a very nice muscle mass gain in patients. The hormone does reduce fat mass, though, I believe that's been proven.

You might be thinking of creatine as it's main purpose is helping the body retain water. I've always been under the impression HGH will help out true muscle mass.

doublem23
02-19-2008, 09:08 PM
You might be thinking of creatine as it's main purpose is helping the body retain water. I've always been under the impression HGH will help out true muscle mass.

Well, creatine also, I believe allows the muscle fibers (IIRC) to stretch out further, giving you a more "complete" and productive workout than just lifting weights or running without it, so in the long run you will end up building more muscle mass.