A-Rod destroys our national innoncence.
Is not even A-rod, the player who never had a controversy in his life, free from such mess?
about 3 years ago
mazoboom
67 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Barely!
I think you used timing-enhancing drugs!
Kansas City Royals: your 2006 and 2007 NL Central champions!
Hey until blogs start testing for them I've got no comment
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
Oh, you deleted yours?
I was gonna delete mine from the record books since you were first.
I was just gonna put an asterisk next to yours.
Kansas City Royals: your 2006 and 2007 NL Central champions!
This steroid revelation actually bothers me
Ouch… sucks for the MLB.
Bonds, Giambi, Clemens, all those other guys, I didn’t care when it was revealed. This one bothers me. Last thing we needed to hear about was steroids, ugh. Go away. It’s going to be non-stop with this for the next 20 years now
by Royal from Queens on Feb 7, 2009 11:54 AM EST reply actions
Way to handle things, everyone involved
feds, union, mlb…
Amnesty was the best idea, and now we have the feds leaking supposedly confidential stuff left and right. Nice.
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 7, 2009 11:56 AM EST up reply actions
I wonder what the real stats are?
Didn’t they say something like 20% tested positive in these private test? Is it a coincidence that the 20% are all the best players?
I say let Ryan Howard use steroids just to see what the bar is for HR’s with steroids. 100?
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
So, who thinks A-Rod gets the same sh*t Bonds does
when A-Rod breaks Bonds HR record? No, me neither.
This really sucks. Call me naive, but i didn’t ever really suspect him to be a juicer, unlike some other players.
The Allard Baird of incisive internet discourse.
I think Bonds bad rep is based purely off him being an
A-hole. Bonds was a Hall of Famer prior to taking steroids and should make it to the Hall regardless. If they keep him out IMO they might as well get rid of the Hall all together.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
by kcscoliny on Feb 7, 2009 12:41 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I agree
But i await the hypocrisy amongst the media with relish. Not.
The Allard Baird of incisive internet discourse.
I don't know...I think the media has been licking their chops on
A-Roid for sometime now. We’ll see if they go for the kill.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
Yeah, I agree, I'm sure we've all been through this before but
notice how Giambi kept on playing and nobody really brings his stuff up. They just admire how he has quietly held his cool through his troubles!
Kansas City Royals: your 2006 and 2007 NL Central champions!
yeah,
how A-Rod handles this will really make a big difference.
Good thing he’s got a great PR support staff around him who rarely fail him, and prevent him from making any obvious missteps…
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 7, 2009 1:29 PM EST up reply actions
I'm half-tempted
to start singing the song “Schadenfreude” from Avenue Q.
This just re-enforces the fact that
EVERYONE HAS BEEN DOING STEROIDS SINCE POSSIBLY THE 1960s! Maybe not everyone, but the naiveness of the pundits who were saying they couldn’t wait for A-Rod to break Bonds’ record is laughable now.
It is called the Guillermo Mota rule. If a guy who looks like THAT can be on steroids, anyone can. We don’t even know for sure if Hank Aaron did some form of steroids (he did seem to perform well into his later years, didn’t he?), but this will undoubtedly cause the media to once again throw Hank on their shoulders and parade him around again as the true beacon of integrity.
This will also lead to more people saying “BASEBALL IS BROKEN STEROID POLICY FAILS,” overlooking the fact that this was in 2003.
Banny being Banny.
Aaron’s later years were helped because he moved into a more favorable home run park.
One might ask about “Greeinies.”
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 7, 2009 2:43 PM EST up reply actions
Well...
Tom House, the player who was in the bullpen who caught Hank’s 715th HR ball, said this last year…
“I pretty much popped everything cold turkey’, House said. "We were doing steroids they wouldn’t give to horses. That was the ‘60s when nobody knew. The good thing is, we know now. There’s a lot more research and understanding.”
House, 58, estimated that six or seven pitchers per team were at least experimenting with steroids or human growth hormone. He said players talked about losing to opponents using more effective drugs,
“We didn’t get beat, we got out-milligrammed”, he said. “And when you found out what they were taking, you started taking them”.
— SF Chronicle
Banny being Banny.
Huh
Interesting. Hadn’t read anything like that. Very interesting.
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 7, 2009 2:54 PM EST up reply actions
Good point
You can’t tell me guys in baseball weren’t doing it back in the 60’s-70’s. A ton of NFL players,track stars,etc were all doing it and baseball players have always had the highest ceiling for potential income. Hard to believe with that carrot out there alot of players weren’t trying to get any competitive edge they could.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
April 10th
Yankees
Royals
Kauffman Stadium
Be there.
We have a bit to live up to, since the Yankees will be in Baltimore first, and I think Baltimore has proven themselves to be good at booing people involved with roids.
It might not be as much fun, but why stop with A-Rod? There are at least 103 other players who tested positive you don’t know about yet. Maybe you should just boo everybody.
I'm coming for you, Eckstein!
If Willie B. was a positive, I’m not sure how I’ll recover
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 7, 2009 3:53 PM EST up reply actions
I’m 5’ 10", 180 lbs, had a career slugging percentage of .372, and was the first player to be suspended under baseball’s steroid policy. Who am I?
Alex Sanchez!
Didn’t even have to look it up, and I remember him actually hitting some home runs (a rarity for him) after the tests… someone had him in my main fantasy league
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 7, 2009 4:39 PM EST up reply actions
Turns out grit wasn't as nebulous as we thought
It’s actually a horse-steroid that turns your sweat into small grains of dust. Physical exertion is therefore excruciatingly painful.
OR
boo nobody.
Steroids are irrelevant to my enjoyment of the game – and NOTHING the media, the feds, or anybody else can say, do, or reveal can change that, unless I LET THEM CHANGE IT.
Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!
Keep in mind, one of the most popular Royals of all time...
…likely did the juice, in Mike Sweeney. That is why I feel no one fanbase can point fingers and bring signs with asterisks on them.
Banny being Banny.
was he in the Mitchell Report?
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 7, 2009 4:40 PM EST up reply actions
They are discussing that at RC
He has been linked a few different ways. I won’t boo ARod because of roids I’ll boo him because I just don’t like him. I will also boo Jeter, Posada, etc all because they where the pinstripes. And I’ll doubly boo Joba because I didn’t like the Yankees the Cornhusker or his character in Star Wars and I hate that Hutt language. If you are gonna be in the US speak English damn you Joba the Hutt.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
by kcscoliny on Feb 7, 2009 4:45 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
The problem is that no repercussions for A-Rod, other than possibly deflated Hall of Fame votes, will ever be put forth. Bonds, Giambi, and Clemens are still riding high and living free, many years after their stories broke.
Could this lead to a slow death of the sport, though? Possibly, but certainly not instantly.
The Nation at large. I'll be playing the role of RR Resident Optimist this offseason. What role will you assume?
Well, Bonds and Clemens are riding high and living free except for having to respond to or anticipate federal felony charges.
What repercussions, leaving those aside, would you find sufficient?
I don't know
Jail time, hefty suspensions/fines, banishment from the Baseball Hall of Fame, community service
The Nation at large. I'll be playing the role of RR Resident Optimist this offseason. What role will you assume?
by Royals Nation on Feb 7, 2009 7:21 PM EST up reply actions
but waterboarding is off the table, right?
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 7, 2009 7:25 PM EST up reply actions
You want them to be convicted of a crime in a court of law for which the penalty is jail time, yes? Bonds’ trial is scheduled for next month, so we’ll see how he fares, and soon. The grand jury investigating Clemens hasn’t brought any charges yet, so I think you’re jumping the gun in his case.
My personal view, and I know that lots of people don’t agree, is that excluding these guys from the Hall of Fame hurts the Hall of Fame. I’m fully convinced that some number of PEDs users have already been inducted, and I’m quite sure that more of them will be in the future, because their usage isn’t known. No, I’m not trying to say that widespread usage makes it “all right”. I’m trying to point out the dilemma of imperfect knowledge that any arbiter of “Hall-worthiness” will have will trying to uphold a reasonable and impartial standard. For example, what do you want to do if information comes to light regarding PEDs usage after someone’s induction? Toss the guy out? With what procedure? A hearing? A jury trial? Will the Hall institute an annual BBWAA vote on which players to remove?
My view is that it’s better to put guys into the Hall on the basis of their performances — including Bonds and Clemens, who certainly belong — and also open an exhibit on the PEDs era in order to preserve the history of baseball in full. Generations of baseball fans can go to Cooperstown to marvel at their achievements and also to learn how so many of us in their time came to view their achievements as doubtful. That, it seems to me, is the best and most permanent virtual asterisk.
I know, Rose and Jackson. Special exclusions there because of permanent bans — one negotiated by the player himself! — and not relevant in my mind.
Damn it.
I was going to bring up Rose when you said “on the basis of their performances”, but you covered your ass.
I just got back from your mom's basement.
Pete Rose gets mentioned in every conversation about the Hall. Promotional genius. Probably faked those betting slips just to guarantee a permanent legacy.
Outside of the fact that I think
Pete wants in the Hall more than anything else in his life, I’d agree with you.
I just got back from your mom's basement.
I agree......
The state of journalism these days makes me angrier than Johnny Rotten at a Pink Floyd concert….its absolutely shameful how politics are covered, and the same type of mentality is reflected in mainstream sports coverage. An “anti science” or anti-intellectual bias (grit is superior to VORP), and a hunger or thirst to sensationalize everything, weakens any real reporting. The mainstream media tries to groove to that Bob Costas vibe, when they should be channeling Voros McCracken, Bill James, or Joltin Joe Sheehan. I thought Bluster Only was going to hyperventilate on ESPN News….here’s a mindbender, should surgery to correct your vision be considered a performance enhancement?
by Nighthawk at the Diner on Feb 7, 2009 10:41 PM EST up reply actions
For a Blusterful example, in his screed of the day on ESPN.com, “A-Rod now tarnished forever”, he writes, “Nobody linked to this issue [steroid use] probably will [get into the Hall of Fame].”
It must be a relief for the people of the future to know they don’t have to think about stuff like this. They may have more information than he has now, and they may have a better perspective on the problem, free of personal bias about any of these guys, but no need: Bluster has made up their minds for them. That’s handy for them, because now they’re free to rush to judgement on the knotty problems of their own day.
Bluster follows up yesterday’s blog enty, “Players need to show fans they care about them”, with “A-Rod must decide on a path”.
All this makes me wonder whether he has given up writing about sports and taken on the job of writing the Advice to the Lovelorn column. Let’s see what he comes up with tomorrow.
I think it is relevant.
But not for the reasons one might immediately assume.
I have a feeling that there are a bunch of writers who don’t want to vote for steroid users precisely because of Pete Rose; that is, if Rose is “banned” from the hall, then they’re not going to vote for anyone else who broke the rules.
Of course, that leads me to think they should just put Rose in and be done with it, thereby returning us to the good old days of “Look, Ty Cobb’s in the hall of fame, who are we to judge?”
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
I think there is an element of payback in the posture on PEDs that BBWAA members have taken, but I don’t think it has much to do with Rose. I think it has much more to do with their change in status in relation to the players over the last 35 years, and the steroids flap has given them a perfect excuse to enact some vengeance.
When those BBWAA members were starting out (or, if they’re a little younger, in the vivid memories of their immediate predecessors and mentors), they made more money than most of the players did, and their relationships with the players were much more cordial, in many cases even friendly. It must have been a completely different situation from what they find themselves in today, when someone like Barry Bonds is quite willing to call them “ants” — and right in the middle of a press conference! Resentment must run very very deep.
Eventually, probably sluggardly, the BBWAA membership will begin to consider the effect that their posturing has on the Hall, that a Hall without Bonds and Clemens is a Hall of a Different Universe and not the Baseball Hall of Fame. Membership will turn over as well, with new members having worked all their lives in the situation we have now, with players aloof with their riches. At some point one of them will come up with the bright idea that memorializing the past, and not burying it, is a pretty OK idea for a museum.
You've unraveled the nature of my bitch.......
Of course there is no way to know, but it seems plausible that the evolving relationship between ballplayers and reporters, and the changing nature of how the traditional print media survives in todays day and age, all have an impact on how this type of “scandal” is reported. If I can play Dr. Phil, I’d say the “payback” angle makes a lot of sense. For example, I think if you rationally look at how Bonds was covered, even PRE – steriod rumors and allegations, he got an extremely raw deal. Sure, he’s an arrogant SOB, maybe unlikeable, difficult, etc….. but how he morphed into the worlds biggest a-hole was a creature unto itself. The Bonds + media relationship shows how reporters can grind an axe. I think the steriod thing is similar. And beyond all this faux outrage, I don’t get the double standard between the NFL and MLB? What gets a yawn in the NFL becomes Bluster Only’s bete noire in the MLB. Its a crazier than a shithouse rat, I tell you.
by Nighthawk at the Diner on Feb 8, 2009 3:26 PM EST up reply actions
Yes, there’s no way to know. However, I think it’s clear that the nature of baseball journalism has changed in conjunction with the vast changes in player compensation. To gauge the change, remember that Ball Four was an eye-opener in its day. Would a similar tell-all diary by a contemporary player have a similar impact today, or would it be viewed as stale material?
I think the subtext of typical sports journalism these days is that the players are unworthy of our best hopes rather than that they are elected to represent them. I may be making a little leap here in assuming that this stems from a perception that they are overly privileged - not only rarely gifted but nowadays also handsomely paid - and that a natural resentment that results from such a perception would work itself out in peevish posturing.
I don’t know why athletes from other sports mostly get a pass. Could be simply that it’s easier for writers to treat baseball players as guys who are basically like themselves but just got lucky, and who are therefore fair game for their moralizing. Football players are not like the rest of us — they have to withstand and maybe even enjoy an unusual amount of physical punishment. And basketball players typically have clearly distinct physical characteristics. Although baseball probably is the hardest of these sports to play well, and even though Bill James says that baseball players are really the best athletes, there are always enough professional baseball players who look like shlubs to fool people into thinking, “That could have been me.” But this is just a tentative guess on my part.
Thanks, SB Nation, for interpreting my double-hyphens as strikethroughs. Let’s try that again.
" I may be making a little leap here in assuming that this stems from a perception that they are overly privileged – not only rarely gifted by nowadays also handsomely paid – and that a natural resentment the results from such a perception would work itself out in peevish posturing."
Lead to a slow death?
Well, if you judge by the last half-decade, it has not hurt the game one damn bit – much to the chagrin of the media, the feds, and Congress.
Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!
Fortunately the NY media should go easy on A-Rod. Ha.
Ouch. This should test how much negative press a human can take before they physically explode. Wonder what the reaction would be if this were Jeter rather than A-Rod.
Actually
I think there is a pretty good chance they would totally turn on Jeter, sort of like they did on Pete Rose — since he “betrayed” their self-constructed image of him.
(Of course, I say this as someone who can’t stand Pete Rose.)
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 7, 2009 10:10 PM EST up reply actions
I don't like Jeter much but he is Mr Consistent
I think most of these guys that were doing roids had a feel of insecurity. Jeter seems anything but insecure with himself. He and ManRam would surprise me if they were doing them.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
Good point.
Supposedly the main reason Bonds turned to steroids was his jealousy over McGuire & Sosa outshining him. I’m just sincerely curious how the NY media mob would react if their golden child was stained. I have a bad feeling once Jeter is out of baseball his desire for attention will get him into politics, and we’ll have another handsome mediocrity in the U.S. Senate for forty years.
by hunter s. royal on Feb 7, 2009 11:18 PM EST up reply actions
I dunno
I suspect Jeter has a lot of baggage we don’t know about now that would come out if he ever got into politics… but you never know.
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 7, 2009 11:28 PM EST up reply actions
What I want to know
is how dirty is college baseball? I’ve got a couple of friends that played D1 and both of them have admitted that players there were juicing. I played ball at a small college and we had 4 or 5 players on the juice as well.
What is the NCAA testing like?
I just got back from your mom's basement.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- MLB Fan Cave candidate explains the stories behind his 30 MLB mascot tattoos
- Kate Upton’s new MLB 2K12 ad is really something
- Five tips for Showtime’s second season of ‘The Franchise,’ featuring the Miami Marlins
- The 10 best things about being a Detroit Tigers fan
- Surprise! A’s finally end the Yoenis Cespedes derby with $36 million deal for Cuban star
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
