Agree with you, RJM.
igball,
I think there may have been cases where a college coach told a prospective recruit or player who wasn't getting playing time that he had to "get big" if he wanted a scholarship or to play.
The coach can then say he only wanted the kid to lift, but I think there have been a lot of kids who took that as direction to use steroids.
Just speculation on my part.
I think there may have been cases where a college coach told a prospective recruit or player who wasn't getting playing time that he had to "get big" if he wanted a scholarship or to play.
The coach can then say he only wanted the kid to lift, but I think there have been a lot of kids who took that as direction to use steroids.
Just speculation on my part.
when a coach or scout tells a kid who has been vigorously lifting and conditioning thru-out high school yrs that he still needs to got "bigger & stronger" ...just what IS the kid supposed to think?quote:by CaDad: I think there may have been cases where a college coach told a prospective recruit or player who wasn't getting playing time that he had to "get big" if he wanted a scholarship or to play.
The coach can then say he only wanted the kid to lift, but I think there have been a lot of kids who took that as direction to use steroids.
how so? it's use has already shown very high rewards and little/no health risk ...quote:by igball: if there was a strong steriod testing policy in professional sports, use of it among the young would go away
I don't see guys on the list dropping dead or growing 2 heads
wouldn't it seem more urgent for youngsters to use it to get a head start
cadad, i understand what you're saying. my son, a 2010, was told by a major di school that they are interested in him but he should get faster and stronger. neither my son nor i took that to mean get on the stuff but some will i'm sure.
the larger point may be the over infatuation with size that is an off shoot of the sterioid era. with better testing, maybe including the collegiate level too, the over emphasis on physical size vs tools may be reduced.
where by the way is the ncaa on all this? you know that these college football players are using the stuff as are the NFL players.
the larger point may be the over infatuation with size that is an off shoot of the sterioid era. with better testing, maybe including the collegiate level too, the over emphasis on physical size vs tools may be reduced.
where by the way is the ncaa on all this? you know that these college football players are using the stuff as are the NFL players.
Clemens attorney said
“Everybody assumes this is true and a man’s reputation and all these years is thrown and gone just like that,” Hardin said during a news conference at his Houston office. “Even if it turns out it didn’t happen, he is ruined.”
Hardly a vigorous denial.
“Everybody assumes this is true and a man’s reputation and all these years is thrown and gone just like that,” Hardin said during a news conference at his Houston office. “Even if it turns out it didn’t happen, he is ruined.”
Hardly a vigorous denial.
quote:Originally posted by Bee>:
when a coach or scout tells a kid who has been vigorously lifting and conditioning thru-out high school yrs that he still needs to got "bigger & stronger" ...just what IS the kid supposed to think?
.... it's use has already shown very high rewards and little/no health risk ...
I don't see guys on the list dropping dead or growing 2 heads
wouldn't it seem more urgent for youngsters to use it to get a head start
I'm assuming this to mean little/no SHORT TERM health risks. Kids can't think far enough out to worry about what'll happen to them when they're 40 or 50. So in that regard, yes, some of the kids who feel pressured to bulk up etc. won't think twice about using. We can preach to them till we're blue in the face, but without tangeable evidence of something bad happening to them NEXT WEEK it'll go in one ear and out the other. At the very least that bad thing that's going to happen if they use needs to be getting busted and kicked off the team.
agree -quote:by stymm: I'm assuming this to mean little/no SHORT TERM health risks. Kids can't think far enough out to worry about what'll happen to them when they're 40 or 50.
many listed are 40+. Roger is 45, Bonds about that & they look good. those that have quit using have shrunk back to near normal and from outward apearance seem fine ... that's what the young players see and how they'll form opinions - much like some of todays parents who's memory about the 60's and 70's is fuzzy -
"is something BAD for me because "the man" says so?
quote:Originally posted by Dad04:
Clemens attorney said
“Everybody assumes this is true and a man’s reputation and all these years is thrown and gone just like that,” Hardin said during a news conference at his Houston office. “Even if it turns out it didn’t happen, he is ruined.”
Hardly a vigorous denial.
I think Roger needs a new lawyer. LOL
In the Black Sox scandal and this is a scandal they sent a clear message that gambling and the knowledge of a player gambling would result in those players being banned for life from ever playing the game again. It was done in the best interest of baseball and was a clear message to all remaining and future players what would happen if they crossed the line. Now fast forward to this drug scandal when Mitchell said that he recommended that no punishment be handed out I almost through a glass through my TV. You see the amount of players that are implicated was far greater than anyone imagined and the financial implication is enormous. But isn't that the biggest reason these athletes chose to use and will continue to use these illegal drugs. How does everyone else feel when the message being sent to the young players coming up that you have to be bigger to even have a chance to compete at the next level, they call that potential. Well the players in the Black Sox scandel were acquitted of criminal charges in a court of law yet The commissioner Judge Kenesaw Mountain Landis suspended each player and banned them for life in spite of the fact that all were cleared of criminal charges. Quote "Regardless of the verdict of the juries," he said, "no player that throws a ball game . . . will ever again play professional baseball." What followed was controversy.
While seven of the eight "Black Sox" went so far as confessing, one player seemed to be relatively innocent -- "Shoeless" Joe Jackson. Joseph Jefferson Jackson was one of the best hitters to play the game, finishing with a .356 career average (third all time), and, in the last years before Babe Ruth took over the sport, was arguably the most popular. A sure-fire Hall-of-Famer.
In the Series he hit a robust .375 while setting a major league World Series record with 12 hits, one of which was the only home run hit during the entire Series. Does that sound like the type of performance one trying to lose would have?
While reportedly "Acknowledging that he had let up in key situations," Joe Jackson has received tremendous support over the years for his ban to be lifted and for his induction into the Hall of Fame. Posthumously, unfortunately. The evidence? Apparently not only had he told Comiskey of the fix, but asked to be benched during the series so there was no way anyone could say he had a part in it. Comiskey refused, and actually tried to cover up the fix afterwards to save face.
Both Scandals are driven by money and for this I believe if Selig really wants to act on this scandal he needs to re-write history and bann all players named on the list for life... period no exception. Move swiftly and allow history to tell the story of Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and the rest of the players who put their personal gains before the purity of the game. Let the message be sent and lets get our game back.
While seven of the eight "Black Sox" went so far as confessing, one player seemed to be relatively innocent -- "Shoeless" Joe Jackson. Joseph Jefferson Jackson was one of the best hitters to play the game, finishing with a .356 career average (third all time), and, in the last years before Babe Ruth took over the sport, was arguably the most popular. A sure-fire Hall-of-Famer.
In the Series he hit a robust .375 while setting a major league World Series record with 12 hits, one of which was the only home run hit during the entire Series. Does that sound like the type of performance one trying to lose would have?
While reportedly "Acknowledging that he had let up in key situations," Joe Jackson has received tremendous support over the years for his ban to be lifted and for his induction into the Hall of Fame. Posthumously, unfortunately. The evidence? Apparently not only had he told Comiskey of the fix, but asked to be benched during the series so there was no way anyone could say he had a part in it. Comiskey refused, and actually tried to cover up the fix afterwards to save face.
Both Scandals are driven by money and for this I believe if Selig really wants to act on this scandal he needs to re-write history and bann all players named on the list for life... period no exception. Move swiftly and allow history to tell the story of Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and the rest of the players who put their personal gains before the purity of the game. Let the message be sent and lets get our game back.
Lets not forget that Shoeless Joe was illiterate and treated like chattel by the "Old Roman" Comiskey.
Clemons, Petite and Bonds should be banned post haste!
Clemons, Petite and Bonds should be banned post haste!
quote:Originally posted by itsinthegame:quote:Originally posted by Dad04:
Clemens attorney said
“Everybody assumes this is true and a man’s reputation and all these years is thrown and gone just like that,” Hardin said during a news conference at his Houston office. “Even if it turns out it didn’t happen, he is ruined.”
Hardly a vigorous denial.
I think Roger needs a new lawyer. LOL
It does appear Mr. Hardin lacks the standard guard-dog mentality. lol
I heard a pretty thoughtful solution ... whatever happens to players involved (suspensions etc)
1) players deemed as "using" should get an * by any stats and records
2) the official standing MLB record would be restored to the stat with no * (example: Aaron for HRs)
3) the * stats or records would be just footnotes at the bottom of the page
I like it
1) players deemed as "using" should get an * by any stats and records
2) the official standing MLB record would be restored to the stat with no * (example: Aaron for HRs)
3) the * stats or records would be just footnotes at the bottom of the page
I like it
QUESTION:
How do you convict/ban a player on hearsay ? Which is all you have right now---there is no proof that will stand up in any court other than the court of public opinion
I still say you give a two year grace period to get clean and then come in with lifetime suspensions if caught "using". Right now they have now REAL idea as to who did and who didn't use---you and I can speculate just as the report does
How do you convict/ban a player on hearsay ? Which is all you have right now---there is no proof that will stand up in any court other than the court of public opinion
I still say you give a two year grace period to get clean and then come in with lifetime suspensions if caught "using". Right now they have now REAL idea as to who did and who didn't use---you and I can speculate just as the report does
quote:Originally posted by TRhit:
QUESTION:
How do you convict/ban a player on hearsay ?
No conviction is needed. The commish has absolute authority and governance. The Black Sox were banned despite being exxonerated in a court of law.
It would fall under the "for the good of the game" doctrine.
CPLZ
Let us not go back to the stone age---times are different now--
What about your son? You want him convicted on hearsay?
I also think you cannot compare the Black Sox situation or the Pete Rose situation. This situation is totaly different.
Let us not go back to the stone age---times are different now--
What about your son? You want him convicted on hearsay?
I also think you cannot compare the Black Sox situation or the Pete Rose situation. This situation is totaly different.
quote:QUESTION:
How do you convict/ban a player on hearsay ? Which is all you have right now---there is no proof that will stand up in any court other than the court of public opinion
The point is moot. Do you hear any players screaming from the roof tops "I DID NOT USE!!"
Pettitte's agent: "Um uh, um, no comment at this time."
If they were actually innocent, their lawyers would be in court this morning filing lawsuit after lawsuit. Their non-reactions, en masse, tell more than any court proceeding could.
Hundreds of players used, use or will use. That is obvious to all. If the sport has any credibility left, they will input an independant Olympic style testing program, before they fade away like NHL Hockey has.
Baseball under-reacted to the situation for two decades. I think an over-reaction is appropriate now.
I agree with TR regarding a "grace period". But, why on earth 2 years? Why not begining at Spring Training this coming season? One strike and you are banned for life.
quote:Originally posted by TRhit:
CPLZ
Let us not go back to the stone age---times are different now--
What about your son? You want him convicted on hearsay?
I also think you cannot compare the Black Sox situation or the Pete Rose situation. This situation is totaly different.
Should or shouldn't is a different question than how.
Here is truth...If my son were banned from a sport for having purchase orders and cancelled checks for the purchase of illegal drugs...I would tell him he got what he deserves for being a freakin' idiot.
So to answer your question, yup, if my son is that stupid, have at him. Hopefully the lesson will make him a better man.
The players have been running the league now for to long. They have opened pandora's box. Now the penalty needs to be severe and swift. Clemens and Bonds careers and bank accounts have been documented and filled. Hell look what Clemens collected the last 2 years as a non traveling primadonna and Bonds is it any wonder why he is such a negative personality filled with rage.
Did anyone notice the attitude of the players association representative? Concern over what could possibly happen.
For one, IMO every player on that list should be banned for life, take your bank accounts and go away. The game will survive.
And now MLB has an opportunity to impliment a salary cap and a stringent player conduct policy.
Sound Crazy lets look at what the lockout did for the NFL in the 80's many players never regained there positions and the NFL became a great sport because of parity and the salary cap has worked. If you didn't manage it properly you had to release key players and look at the league now.. The NBA and the NHL both had to regain there sports and have. Baseball has an opportunity to regain control of its sport now for the fans, the players who are doing it the right way and for the cities that support the teams. The Yankees and the rest of the big market teams would be forced to play, recruit and manage their teams within the same parameters as the Pttsburgh's and Kansas City markets of the world. And at the same time establish a better product that the fans will admire what has been done and will flock to the stadiums.
Does anyone really care that Bonds or Clemens may or may not make the hall of fame, I for one don't you see they will always be part of the Hall of baseball History as Shoeless Joe jackson, Pete Rose, and Buck Weaver. History will never change and the debates will continue for ever and that is the real beauty of baseball.
Leveling the playing field and cleaning up the sport is and should be the only concern and the banning of 100 or 200 players in the long run will benefit everyone who ever stepped on the field or dreamed of being the next Eckstein, Greg Maddux, or Hank Aaron.
New Heroes and legends will be discovered. Baseball history and the game will go on. Bring up the players let them play and lets get back to the purity of the game.
Did anyone notice the attitude of the players association representative? Concern over what could possibly happen.
For one, IMO every player on that list should be banned for life, take your bank accounts and go away. The game will survive.
And now MLB has an opportunity to impliment a salary cap and a stringent player conduct policy.
Sound Crazy lets look at what the lockout did for the NFL in the 80's many players never regained there positions and the NFL became a great sport because of parity and the salary cap has worked. If you didn't manage it properly you had to release key players and look at the league now.. The NBA and the NHL both had to regain there sports and have. Baseball has an opportunity to regain control of its sport now for the fans, the players who are doing it the right way and for the cities that support the teams. The Yankees and the rest of the big market teams would be forced to play, recruit and manage their teams within the same parameters as the Pttsburgh's and Kansas City markets of the world. And at the same time establish a better product that the fans will admire what has been done and will flock to the stadiums.
Does anyone really care that Bonds or Clemens may or may not make the hall of fame, I for one don't you see they will always be part of the Hall of baseball History as Shoeless Joe jackson, Pete Rose, and Buck Weaver. History will never change and the debates will continue for ever and that is the real beauty of baseball.
Leveling the playing field and cleaning up the sport is and should be the only concern and the banning of 100 or 200 players in the long run will benefit everyone who ever stepped on the field or dreamed of being the next Eckstein, Greg Maddux, or Hank Aaron.
New Heroes and legends will be discovered. Baseball history and the game will go on. Bring up the players let them play and lets get back to the purity of the game.
quote:by ryno: And now MLB has an opportunity to impliment a salary cap and a stringent player conduct policy.
Sound Crazy lets look at what the lockout did for the NFL in the 80's many players never regained there positions and the NFL became a great sport because of parity and the salary cap has worked. If you didn't manage it properly you had to release key players and look at the league now..
that's an interesting observation, but does Selig seem smart enough to figure that out - let alone pull it off ...
hmmm, maybe he happless lost act is a deceptive ruse
Gentlemen and Ladies
Go to the SI site and view the cancelled checks--nowhere does it says drugs on the checks and or money orders---it won't hold up in court---they could be for anything--A tip to the clubhouse guy for instance
I am not saying they did not use--BUT there is no solid proof here
Go to the SI site and view the cancelled checks--nowhere does it says drugs on the checks and or money orders---it won't hold up in court---they could be for anything--A tip to the clubhouse guy for instance
I am not saying they did not use--BUT there is no solid proof here
them are some nice tips, guess we'll never know about the guys who were smart enough to "tip" in cash money 
except Gagne & Brown who apparently cleverly over-nited cash (an urgent tip) to the drug dealer via USPS so there'd be no paper trail (oops, forgot about the USPS paper trail) ...
and Brown is a college guy too ... tho not sure he ever finished
wonder why Radowski wouldn't take a personal check from Gimsley or Lansing?
did they maybe bounce a few??
and Brown is a college guy too ... tho not sure he ever finished
wonder why Radowski wouldn't take a personal check from Gimsley or Lansing?
did they maybe bounce a few??
Thats right we will never know, and how about the ones that got away? They cant prove who did it 100% and those accused cant prove they did not.
Just getting the finger pointed at you does alot of damage. But it sure takes alot more time to repair a reputation. In most cases innocent or not, you will never fully recover.
Just getting the finger pointed at you does alot of damage. But it sure takes alot more time to repair a reputation. In most cases innocent or not, you will never fully recover.
quote:Originally posted by TRhit:
Gentlemen and Ladies
Go to the SI site and view the cancelled checks--nowhere does it says drugs on the checks and or money orders---it won't hold up in court---they could be for anything--A tip to the clubhouse guy for instance
I am not saying they did not use--BUT there is no solid proof here
Let's examine that.
I am in the process of writing a check for a few thousand dollars for a controlled substance. I don't have a doctor's prescription for it and I am not buying it from the local pharmacy, but rather from a clubhouse guy running an illegal operation.
I am going to write "drugs" on the checks?
TR, these fella's income would disqualify them from claiming an IRS deduction, so that would not be a reason to write "drugs" on the check.
Most criminals who forge a check don't write "forgery" on it.
Have you ever heard of circumstantial evidence. It is just as good as direct evidence. There does not have to be a witness who stood there and watched them write the check for "drugs."
There does not need to be a witness who saw the needle go into the person's behind.
Most folks who are guilty of criminal conduct do not admit it and are convicted based on circumstantial evidence. That is admissable and these checks are part of that type of evidence.
AS MUCH AS I AM APALLED OF THIS BEHAVIOR AND THE IMPACT IT HAS CAUSED ON THE SPORT AND MOST IMPORTANTLY OUR YOUNG PEOPLE. I AM BECOMING CONCERNED THAT THERE ARE MANY WHO CONDONE THIS BEHAVIOR PERHAPS EVEN SOME OF THE POSTERS ON THIS SITE. IS A LITTLE CHEATING OK AS LONG AS YOU WIN? YOU SEE I DO BELIEVE THAT WE ARE SOMEWHAT LESS OUTRAGED BY THE USE OF PED IN SPORTS DUE TO THE AMOUNT OF MEDIA ATTENTION WE HAVE HEARD IN THE LAST 10 YEARS OR SO. BUT WHY A SLAP ON THE WRIST THESE ARE WEALTHY PLAYERS LET THEM GO BACK TO REAL AMERICA GET A JOB OR OPEN A BUSINESS AND LETS CLEANUP AND FIX THE SPORT. AFTER ALL IT IS THE SPORT THAT WILL LIVE ON AND HOPEFULLY FOR THE BETTER
RYNO
I think a lot of people just nod and say, "oh yeah well every business has pitfalls. Athletes use PED, cement contractors bid the job with top quality prices and then install mid-quality... oh yeah, that's just the way it is...
I'm with you, it drives me crazy. Here's Clemens, as gifted guy that ever walked the earth... had a great career but couldn't let it go at that, had to go chemical... what an imposter!!!
I think a lot of people just nod and say, "oh yeah well every business has pitfalls. Athletes use PED, cement contractors bid the job with top quality prices and then install mid-quality... oh yeah, that's just the way it is...
I'm with you, it drives me crazy. Here's Clemens, as gifted guy that ever walked the earth... had a great career but couldn't let it go at that, had to go chemical... what an imposter!!!
This is an interesting perspective...A Sad Day for the Game
It has nothing to do with condoning---it has to do with condemning without proof--as I said previously over and over--do you want your son condemned on the basis of no proof? Just on the basis of hearsay?
For Mr California---where does it say the checks were written for a controlled substance other than in your mind ?-- Ironically "California Dreamin" by the Mamas and Paps just popped up on the radio
BTW poeple write checks for prescriptions and they are duly noted as such-- granted a check not noted can be for anything but it is not proof of buying illegal drugs---that is my point
For Mr California---where does it say the checks were written for a controlled substance other than in your mind ?-- Ironically "California Dreamin" by the Mamas and Paps just popped up on the radio
BTW poeple write checks for prescriptions and they are duly noted as such-- granted a check not noted can be for anything but it is not proof of buying illegal drugs---that is my point
TR,
What do YOU think the checks are for?
And before you answer that, understand that as a coach, people ask you to make judgements every day about their kids. Your answer is directly tied to your ability to see things for what they are and make judgements.
What do YOU think the checks are for?
And before you answer that, understand that as a coach, people ask you to make judgements every day about their kids. Your answer is directly tied to your ability to see things for what they are and make judgements.
CPLZ
Unlike you I do not speculate to condemn
They could be for anything---
Unlike you I do not speculate to condemn
They could be for anything---
bub, that perspective is the ol' "if everyone's cheating .. then no-one's cheating" outlook
quote:Originally posted by TRhit:
CPLZ
Unlike you I do not speculate to condemn
They could be for anything---
What you call speculation, I call evidence of wrongdoing.
When I hear hoofsteps, I think horses, not unicorns.
"TR, What do YOU think the checks (to a confessed drug dealer) are for?"
I am not making excuses for anyone. We are all responsible for our own actions. But, players shouldn't take the all the blame. The owners and management knew what was going on and looked the other way for years.
TRhit please stop, your losing creditability
RYNO
You have lost all yours with me
I ask you the same question as I would ask myself--if your/my son got accused(and mine was) of the same thing what would you do without proof from the accuser ? You call your son guilty on the basis of hearsay?
You have lost all yours with me
I ask you the same question as I would ask myself--if your/my son got accused(and mine was) of the same thing what would you do without proof from the accuser ? You call your son guilty on the basis of hearsay?
quote:Originally posted by TRhit:
RYNO
You have lost all yours with me
I ask you the same question as I would ask myself--if your/my son got accused(and mine was) of the same thing what would you do without proof from the accuser ? You call your son guilty on the basis of hearsay?
TR,
If the same evidence existed against your son, and he admitted privately to you that he was guilty...what would you counsel him to do about it?
The owners knew what was happening and tacitly or openly encouraged it. The players DID it. IMHO, the players take the brunt of the blame.
The Union? That would be the players again. Fehr fights for them, he doesn't dictate to them.
The maxim in crime is Follow The Money. Yes, the clubs made money for all the Arms and Hammers; then they paid their overhead before they profitted. The players got their fat contracts; then they took the money home.
Whether it was Clemens and Bonds or Joe Journeyman, they (allegedly
) took controlled substances illegally to hold onto a MINIMUM six figure a year job.
A positive test or the type of evidence turned up in the report turned up against a FedEx driver...he'd be canned on the spot. Why not ballplayers? The owners are afraid the public won't support the type of baseball that's left? (Why not, we did before all this) Then why does baseball treat non-union MiLB players the same way --- suspend them for x games then back to Business As Usual?
The sport needs a serious, probably monthly testing system. One strike and you're out. Expensive? For a $6 billion industry employing around 6,000 ballplayers? Think 1% of that, dedicated to the integrity of the game, will cover it?
The Union? That would be the players again. Fehr fights for them, he doesn't dictate to them.
The maxim in crime is Follow The Money. Yes, the clubs made money for all the Arms and Hammers; then they paid their overhead before they profitted. The players got their fat contracts; then they took the money home.
Whether it was Clemens and Bonds or Joe Journeyman, they (allegedly
) took controlled substances illegally to hold onto a MINIMUM six figure a year job. A positive test or the type of evidence turned up in the report turned up against a FedEx driver...he'd be canned on the spot. Why not ballplayers? The owners are afraid the public won't support the type of baseball that's left? (Why not, we did before all this) Then why does baseball treat non-union MiLB players the same way --- suspend them for x games then back to Business As Usual?
The sport needs a serious, probably monthly testing system. One strike and you're out. Expensive? For a $6 billion industry employing around 6,000 ballplayers? Think 1% of that, dedicated to the integrity of the game, will cover it?
Nice post Orlando.
Mr. California?