What message does this send?

quote:

Originally posted by PGStaff:

1. They cheated - Cheating by itself goes on in nearly every sport and has a long history in baseball. I once asked a player, "Would you cheat in order to win a game"? His reply was, "Not only would I cheat to win a game, but I wouldn't want to play with someone who wouldn't"! That is how competitive some people can be. Not saying it's right, but maybe it's the degree of cheating that counts the most.

3. It sets a bad example for our youth - This is probably the #1 most important item. To me, this is the biggest problem.

PG, as to item #3, a local writer who is quite good had an editorial this week. He ended it with a warning to Moms and Dads that they need to be checking their mail box. Bryd and others have proven these types of illegal drugs are available...over the internet. So, it isn't only the example that Byrd and others set by standing in front of a TV set and describing how to obtain this stuff, it is also the enormous $7,500,000 reward Byrd received within a few weeks of this being disclosed. Players in high school have now heard how this can be obtained, are not likely to truly know the downsides, and a within a few weeks learn this same player is $7,500,000 richer.

With regard to "cheating," doesn't it sound wrong to even suggest a level of cheating of this type needs to be permitted/tolerated because it is being done and that is the way some players conduct themselves?
That message, for baseball, it's players, it fans, and perhaps most importantly those who 14-18 years old who aspire to the next level means, IMO, the issue will become worse over time, not bet better or stay the same.
Shouldn't the focus be on those that don't cheat and evening the playing surface so it is a skill based game and those with the best skills, not the best dentist and pharmacist are the ones who play.
I will go one step further and say the Indians and MLB had a chance to step up and show courage on this issue.
Bryd stood in front of cameras and almost "flaunted" what he had done to obtain HGH and the extent and time of his use. This wasn't Bonds or Gary Matthews who deny everything. This was recorded for everyone to see and hear.
By picking up his option, and paying him $7,500,000, I think MLB and it's ownership group showed they will accept and tolerate cheating. I think this entire scenario increases the incentives to push the envelope so to speak because the financial rewards are considerable. IMO, this pushes the line for which "cheating" will be tolerated several steps beyond where we might have thought it was before Byrd came "clean" so to speak.

I think those are some very good points infielddad.

Glove Man


I know full well that alcohol is a depressent but nobody can tell me that the likes of Ruth,Mantle didnt thrive on booze---in Mantle's case it killed a lot of his physical pain---trust me I can recall the nites I elbowed up with the likes of Mantle, Martin, Bauer etc---booze for them was a performance enhancer because they could not perform without it in their blood

Of course, the one thing I doubt any of has actually seen is Byrd's contract. It could very well list some pretty interesting points that could drastically change things, including the 7.5 mil.

The Indians could have not signed him, but do we think the other 29 clubs would have not signed him? I'm not sticking up for anyone, just trying to point out that this is not simple! However much time we think about these things is probably nowhere near the time spent by those who are offering the contract and running the business.

I doubt you meant to sound this way PG when mentioning what the other 29 teams might have done, but isn't that a little like things we get frustrated with our kids about? Don't we try and discourage that argument from them? And isn't it just what a HS kid might say to justify using alchohol/drugs/steroids?

"Well, Mom/Dad...everyone else is doin' "it" (whatever "it" is?) so why shouldn't/can't I?"

I am in no way a perfect person, but I do wish all 30 clubs would say "no." Imagine the wonderful message that would send to our youth?

You can rest assured that some other team would have signed him if the Indians didn't--- there are not many guys winning upwards of 12 games any more in any given season

We attended a coaching seminar over 10 years ago, where a very well respected pitching coach was the key note speaker. Besides him saying you know the book that I just published, throw it away because I have new techniques on pitching, one of the most shocking things he said was if you are not taking “supplements” you are working at a disadvantage since the next guy is most likely doing it!

We though it was so sad, but I guess he was right!

quote:

---booze for them was a performance enhancer because they could not perform without it in their blood

I have to say that I am still trying to understand this comment. I enjoy a good beer (or two or three) from time-to-time...but never has it been anything close to a "peformance enhancer."

Cannot imagine the look on the officer's face if anyone were to ever try that line.

The problem is that the other 29 clubs will not say no. And if they did, would Paul Byrd have a law suit against MLB. We must remember, he has not been banned from the game, received a suspension, etc. despite not denying the allegations.

All 30 clubs sending a message? If he is not using performance enhancing drugs now... What is that message they would be sending? Are they suppose to send a message that as soon as someone's name shows up in the newspaper, that person is done in baseball?

Before much longer this entire problem is going to be much bigger than the Paul Byrd situation. I'm only saying it is hard to figure out what the right approach should be. It's going to get even more difficult as more and more news surfaces.

Why not just let the law handle this thing? I don't know, but am betting there is some language in his contract that could quickly get rid of the 7.5 million. Can't see any reason to jump the gun, but that's just my opinion.

In the meantime, the Indians are rewarding a guy who did a good job for them last year. They are not rewarding him because he bought HGH several years ago. That is not what they're paying him for at all.

There's no reason to make it sound like he's being rewarded 7.5 million for buying drugs. That IMO is sending the wrong message!

quote:

All 30 clubs sending a message? If he is not using performance enhancing drugs now... What is that message they would be sending? Are they suppose to send a message that as soon as someone's name shows up in the newspaper, that person is done in baseball?

Good point. I can agree with you on that.

quote:

The problem is that the other 29 clubs will not say no.

But I cannot agree with this logic. I cannot, in any way, see this as a justification and I see this logic as a problem when discussing this issue with HS kids.

Lawsuit? I'm not a lawyer, but I'd say 'bring it on!'

justbaseball,

First of all, it is great having you back contributing here.

Regarding the other 29 clubs, I didn't mean that as any type of logic. Just happen to think it's true. Maybe not right, but still true! Surely no one thinks the other 29 clubs would boycott Byrd, do they?

quote:

Originally posted by PGStaff:
T We must remember, he has not been banned from the game, received a suspension, etc. despite not denying the allegations.

All 30 clubs sending a message? If he is not using performance enhancing drugs now... What is that message they would be sending? Are they suppose to send a message that as soon as someone's name shows up in the newspaper, that person is done in baseball?

In the meantime, the Indians are rewarding a guy who did a good job for them last year. They are not rewarding him because he bought HGH several years ago. That is not what they're paying him for at all.

There's no reason to make it sound like he's being rewarded 7.5 million for buying drugs. That IMO is sending the wrong message!

PG, Byrd went on TV. This isn't the newspaper thing. He went on TV, admitted he used HGH, admitted he got it from a Fla dentist and admitted using it for 3 years to 2/05.
No one said he is getting $7,500,000 for buying drugs.

If MLB is ever going to have a stronger situation upon which to take a stand, it will be surprising.
PacMan Jones is sitting out this year by edict of the NFL commissioner. Has not been convicted of anything and there is almost unanimous support for the suspension.
Wouldn't it be great if MLB, the Indians, someone came out and said what Bryd did/admits to doing is not in any way condoned.
Here is my view:
I agree they say they paid him $7,500,000 for his performance on the field.
He admits he used HGH, which he purchased without prior disclosure to the team, for 3 years.
HGH is a performance enhancing drug.
He admits he used the HGH to recover from injury and to feel better and stronger.
He is being paid handsomely for performance that was impacted by HGH.

I would just like MLB and the Indians to tell us they have a position on this situation and what that position might be.

PG - Thanks for the kind comment...still not too sure I'm going to be able to contribute much.

But no, I don't think so either (about the 29 other clubs staying away). My frustration is not with you, but we both know that 'everyone else would do it' is something that resonates well with teenagers and I really wish it were not part of the conversation on this topic.

My younger son is a freshman at a private HS in Northern California. They have one of the most successful HS athletic programs in the country (rated #5 athletic program by Sports Illustrated, #1 in California by Student Sports). But they also lay down the law on issues such as drugs, alchohol, etc... on Day-1 and they do not stray from their principles. Doesn't matter who you are, athlete or not. Their approach is very successful as far as I can tell. A few kids each year cross the line and they deal with it quickly and in a straightforward manner.

The result from what I can tell so far is a very dedicated and disciplined staff and student body both academically and athletically and I am becoming convinced the results are directly related to the approach.

Previously I thought this approach would be too rigid. Perhaps sometimes it is. But my eyes have been opened a bit by witnessing it firsthand and seeing the clearly positive results. Almost no one crosses the line they have drawn because the repurcussions are certain and absolute.

And I have never seen one of my kids happier or more lovingly cared for by peers, staff and upperclassmen as I have seen at this HS. I am coming to genuinely like the caring yet no-nonsense approach that they take with the kids. A little of that approach might go a long way with the issue in pro sports and remove a very bad example of how to get there and/or enhance one's performance with a multi-million dollar contract down the road justifying the means...unless we want the government to take care of it for them. That would be bad IMO.

maybe i'm ignorant..........well ok i am, but it is my understanding hgh is not a steroid. and i understand it to be good for us older guys.i'm thinking of changeing my dentist.

my question ,does hgh showup on a test? is it a banned substance in mlb? i know they banned steroids in the 90's but if it isn't a steroid?
i still think the gap is way to wide between mlb and milb. you toe the line until you make it then it's katy bar the door.

quote:

Byrd went on TV. This isn't the newspaper thing. He went on TV, admitted he used HGH, admitted he got it from a Fla dentist and admitted using it for 3 years to 2/05.

maybe the difference is, "is he our team's juicer, or yours"

If we as parents do what we should be doing as parents whatever Byrd or Bonds or any other athlete does, should not influence our kids---it all begins at home !!!

quote:

Originally posted by TRhit:
You can rest assured that some other team would have signed him if the Indians didn't--- there are not many guys winning upwards of 12 games any more in any given season

And that is the sad calamity of this story.


justbaseball is absolutely correct.



By the way, justbaseball--welcome back.

justbaseball, wonderful post.

infielddad,

quote:

Here is my view:
I agree they say they paid him $7,500,000 for his performance on the field.
He admits he used HGH, which he purchased without prior disclosure to the team, for 3 years.
HGH is a performance enhancing drug.
He admits he used the HGH to recover from injury and to feel better and stronger.
He is being paid handsomely for performance that was impacted by HGH

quote:

If we as parents do what we should be doing as parents whatever Byrd or Bonds or any other athlete does, should not influence our kids---it all begins at home !!!

were Bonds, Byrd, etc orphans with NO parental input??

or was the temptation too great??