Cheating history

[jonyrotten]

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/sto...ht&lid=tab1pos1 (Sorry not sure how to hyperlink)

I just wanted to thank you for such an insightful, truthful and kind article. I have strong feelings about the steroid/HGH issues and the players involved in tainting the game I grew up loving. It is easy for me to feel disgust and distain for the likes of Jose Conseco and Barry Bonds but as angry as I was at my once heroes Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa I always noted a sense of moral dilemma especially in Mark McGwire's case. I am a recovering addict and alcoholic with a number of years of sobriety and I too understand what it is to deny and hide from the past within the temporary safety of seclusion and selective isolation. I hope he reads your work. I hope he once again reaches out to those that loved him. I hope he takes responsibility for his past good and bad. I hope he allows himself to heal, I do wish him the best.

I also believe that if the Commissioner of Baseball Bud Selig were truly acting as the protector of baseball and its storied history Roger Maris would (and should) once again be anointed the single season homerun king and that Henry Aaron's worries of being overtaken by a cheat be alleviated. I also believe that due to the subjective nature of the Hall of Fame voting that the voters have a responsibility to take a protective stance and shield the historic Baseball Hall of Fame from today's mistakes for the sake of distant future inductees.

Fair or not, none of the accused should be inducted, I do not see it as a punishment for unproven acts but as a protective measure for the historic institution. I understand that the commissioner's means are very different from the days of Kenesaw Mountain Landis but I believe a heaping plateful of Landis type resolve would be a meal the public would devour no matter how heavily the Fehrs and the Stienbrenners of today's baseball world try to salt it.

Make no mistake we are at a watershed in baseball's history. How would baseball have been viewed if the "Blacksox" were discovered but never held accountable? A sham? A betters or cheats game sold to the highest bidder or more deceptive manipulator or taker? Perhaps Barry Bonds or Mark McGwire should be allowed to become today's "Lefty" Williams and "Shoeless Joe" at least the scales of baseball would once again tilt in the direction of integrity.

Its time to start seeing the big picture and realize that yes, today's issues will become just another part of baseball history but if we condone or allow the sacred record books and/or Hall of Fame to be soured by suspect or false accomplishments what does that do to the comparative value of future players to those passed accomplishments. Think about that the next time you liken Greg Maddux's awesome domination in the nineties to Sandy Koufax in the sixties. Bonds and who...? Didn't he use steroids? Its time to protect the future history of baseball.

[sfgiantsflgators]

Steroids/HGH/etc. should be banned, and those that test positive for them should be suspended - and if it continues...banned.

But there's no way to go back in time, find the players that used, and "erase" them from the books. There's no way to know when someone started using or how many of their stats were accomplished "naturally." We can say player A did this, player B did this, player C did this; but unless everyone just happens to have stashed away some urine, we're never going to know who was using and who was not.

The most logical way to handle it is to label the past couple of decades the "Steroid Era," and take that into account when stacking those players up against the all-time greats. Any records or major feats accomplished in that era would be asterisked and labeled as "done in the Steroid Era."

[carter]

It's McGwire, not McGire.

This is for everyone -- please use care when posting and read over your post before pressing the Post button. Spelling mistakes and grammatical errors can be avoided if you are patient and put some thought into your posts.

[michaeljjt]

It's McGwire, not McGire.

This is for everyone -- please use care when posting and read over your post before pressing the Post button. Spelling mistakes and grammatical errors can be avoided if you are patient and put some thought into your posts.

I always thought it was Macgyver! (roll the theme music now....)

:)

[medric822]

I always thought it was Macgyver! (roll the theme music now....)

thats what I thought this thred was about, lol

[jonyrotten]

[spelling mistakes and grammatical errors can be avoided if you are patient and put some thought into your posts. ]

["Put some thought into your posts"?!?!?!?]

I misspell McGwire one time out of a how many... and that is what you focus on?!?!?!?

michaeljjt is rghit (rlol teh theem muzic now....)...maybe something from Barnum and Bailey would be fitting.

[jonyrotten]

sfgiantsflgators you make good points but considering the level of apathy attributed to something so unprecedented in the history of baseball and comparably more impactful that the "Blacksox" scandle, seems to me there needs to be an exteme act to restore the integrity of the game. Put the cheaters (or accused cheats on the outside)

[jonyrotten]

Whoops! Sorry, I misspelled "extreme"...... doot doot dootaloo doot doot doo doo

[sfgiantsflgators]

sfgiantsflgators you make good points but considering the level of apathy attributed to something so unprecedented in the history of baseball and comparably more impactful that the "Blacksox" scandle, seems to me there needs to be an exteme act to restore the integrity of the game. Put the cheaters (or accused cheats on the outside)

...and I agree that the stain put on baseball by this scandal is huge, but how do we determine who gets left out? There's the obvious answers (Bonds, Sosa, McGwire, Canseco), but what about the "suspects?"

Luis Gonzalez hit 57 in 2001 - after a previous career high of 31 in 2000 (his only season to this date of more than 30). He's got to be thrown out.

What about a guy that was drafted in the 13th round (that scouts had all but written off) who comes out of nowhere to do things at a pace that no one has ever started at. Could he have "juiced up" after falling so low in the draft? These doubts force you to throw Albert Pujols out as well.

That's the problem with such an "extreme act." There's no way to establish set guidelines of reasonable doubt to determine who to exclude. From the first person left out because of suspicion, there are going to be five more that bring up questions. And it will all snowball from there.

Other than positive tests, the only fair and logical way to maintain the integrity of the record books is to insert notations such as "played in the Steroid Era" or "suspected use of performance-enhancers."

[medric822]

wow, it seems that someone has issues, and I predict a "spammer" tag for three post in a row

[jonyrotten]

Good points man, I'm afraid the only way this can be truly handled is for Selig to try to go Kenesaw Mountain on baseball's ***, whether he truly has the power or not. I guess your right the only way is to brand them with some type of astrict... too bad it won't be with an iron... I feel bad for Hammerin' Hank, to accomplish the the highest feat in baseball only to have it lessened by dishonesty. He keeps smiling and holding his tongue but he must be boiling inside! He did let a bit of his unhappiness slip in that one interview tho. I live in Arizona so I remember Bonds as a Sun Devil and a Pirate he would have been one of the best anyway and that just makes me dislike this whole mess even more.

[JP_Frost]

let me just throw one name out there ... Bret Boone

[michaeljjt]

let me just throw one name out there ... Bret Boone

What!?!? you mean his as rapid as the RoadRunner deterioration wasn't due to age?? Well at least I know my athletic life won't come to an end now at 35! :)

[jonyrotten]

Boone called the allegations by Canseco "absolutely ridiculous." The facts, however, do not support this assessment. I do not discount Boone's responsibility and accountability in any way but his possible acts of dishonesty are not threating the most coveted of baseball's records at the moment. There is alot of allegation, allegations are not proof but the Hall of Fame voting is subjective not law and I think exluding the big boys would send an impactful message that would ultimately be recieved by the powers that be. How do you think Petitte, Clemens or a unoin rep like Tom Glavine would react if there was even a hint of doubt cast upon their rightful first ballot road to the hall, Selig could call it something like "a temporary suspension of admmitions" due to "suspicions of rampid use throughout baseball" which of course could somewhat easily be resolved with some serious frequent random and non-random testing and include blood testing for certain cases with impactful consequence for first time offenders. It would force the unions hand in regards to testing. The problem is Selig doesn't have the balls to play a card as heavy as that.

Commissioner Bud Selig has succeeded in centralizing authority over MLB in the commissioner's office, relegating the position of league president to an honorary title. If you don't beleive he can do something so impactful as close the doors to the hall or ban players without consent look it up or just ask Giamatti or Rose (and that was before the re-centralizing authority in the Comish). Bud Selig grow a hair!

[BigRog]

Rose FOR President

put him in the hall

[jonyrotten]

I grew up worshiping Charlie Hustle and Johny Bench. I still have a really old instructional VHS tape that Rose did in the late seventies, its funny he almost cusses a couple of times in front of the kids. He's so gruff and unpolished with people he reminds me of my old man... who was also a lovable alcoholic who bet too much, had a short fuse and refused to admit he was ever wrong. He bet on games he was playing in and then managing and there was strong but hearsay evidence that he bet AGAINST his own team! I have a hard time accepting that ha bet against the Reds because I loved him and think he was the best but what more do you need.

[Homer]

this whold steroid stuff isn't so clear cut. i just thought i should say something about how funny some of the opinions are on tv. i was watching a program about this the other week, and they werer talking about inducting mcgwire to the HOF. the guy on there said he would NEVER vote him in. but he would vote for bonds. complete assinine if you ask me. why he was asked? because bonds was a HOF'er before he took steroids. as if anyone knows "when" bonds took steroids. as if it's so obvious.

we know when he started getting bigger and started hitting more homeruns. but that's no implication for when he was taking them. for all we know, he could've been taking something illegal since college. he just assumed, like many do, that if you're on steroids it makes you bigger and stronger. well just in case you weren't aware, if you're on steroids, you have to bust your butt to get stronger and bigger. it just makes it easier for you. if you never workout, it does nothing. and on some people, they don't get huge.

for instance, anyone can say that they knew that matt lawton or even ryan franklin were on it? they sure didn't look huge to me. nor were either one of them ripping the league apart like bonds and mcgwire did.

so how do we know that no one else in the league was on it too? how do we know pedro wasn't on it? how do we know any other great pitchers or hitters weren't on it? i'm just saying it's not always about looks. if we were basing it on looks, then why not implicate frank thomas, mo vaughn, albert belle, ken griffey jr., ...list goes on. some of those guys were huge. some of them are much bigger now then they were during their rookie seasons, and all of them were plagued with injuries. surely they're all on it too.

my whole point was be consistent with the punishment. the way i saw it, if don't vote in mcgwire, you don't vote in bonds. in the end, i can see if you vote in mcgwire and not bonds though. there's evidence of bonds taking it. there hasn't been evidence for mcgwire (as far as i know, so please enlighten me if there is). there's speculation for mcgwire. but that's pretty much it.

but either way be consistent. i just can't buy putting in bonds, but not mcgwire because he was already a HOF'er before. as if you knew when he started taking it. if that was the case, let in pete rose. he was a HOF'er before he got caught gambling on baseball.

and for awhile, i would've left all of those guys out of the HOF. but i've been back and forth on this, and alas i would probably vote them both in. here's why. since we can't tell who was on what when...since looks alone don't tell you enough...since we have no idea how widespread it was in the league, who knows who's supposed to be punished for it. so i would let them both in. put an asterik next to them though because of the time period.

but ha! that's not my final decision. i'm always back and forth on it. so i would say keep bonds out. because there's proof he's on it. i just wonder why he hasn't been punished for it. but if don't keep him out, you can't keep anybody else out for it either.

makes sense? this is exactly what i meant by it not being so clear cut.