Clemens is no different than Bonds

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slu...yhoo&type=lgns

Year after year he peddled the same garbage, Roger Clemens was so dominant for so long because he simply outworked everyone. It played to the nation's Puritan roots, made Clemens out to be this everyman maximizing his skills through singular focus, dedication and a commitment to drinking carrot juice, or something.

It's all gone now, the legend of Rocket Roger dead on arrival of the Mitchell Report; one of the greatest pitchers of all time, his seven Cy Youngs and 354 career victories lost to history under a pile of lies and syringes.

Clemens was injected with performance-enhancing drugs and human growth hormones by his former trainer starting in 2000 and continuing many times through the years, trainer Brian McNamee told George Mitchell in great detail.

Baseball has its white Barry Bonds.

The sport has been waiting for the other shoe to drop on the 45-year-old Clemens for years. What he did defied not just age, but belief, and if there is one thing we know about Bud Selig's sorry era, it's that if something seems too good to be true, it is.

The smoking gun comes from Brian McNamee, a former New York Yankees employee who used to work as a personal trainer for Clemens and his buddy Andy Pettitte, who is also cited in the report. McNamee is also a witness in a federal investigation and spoke to Mitchell and federal investigators under the penalty of perjury. The details are in Mitchell's 300-plus page, 20-month, $30 million report released Thursday afternoon.

Clemens refused to meet with Mitchell, according to the report. "In order to provide Clemens with information about these allegations and to give him an opportunity to respond, I asked him to meet with me; he declined," Mitchell wrote.

If McNamee is wrong and Mitchell ran with it anyway, then Clemens can sue the former Congressional leader, Major League Baseball and his drug-dealing former trainer for about a billion dollars.

This report, painstakingly investigated and detailed, may be a witch hunt to cleanse Selig's soul, but it isn't operated by fools. It’s extremely unlikely Mitchell and MLB would set itself up for such risk.

No matter what the defense that emerges, Clemens will struggle to ever win in the court of public opinion.

Which leaves baseball fans with the gut-punch reality that the generations' greatest hitter – Bonds – and greatest pitcher – Clemens – are nothing but drug-enhanced cautionary tales.

It is Clemens and his arrogance through the years that makes this one so distasteful. Just like Bonds, he relished in his greatness, seemed to mock all the other mortals who couldn't keep up with his workout regimens, his off-season drive, his freak of nature physical abilities.

He liked to convey that maybe anyone could do this, if they just were as tough as the Texas Con Man.

And just like Bonds, you have to wonder why it was ever necessary. Clemens was an all-time great back in the 1980s and early 1990s, when he was presumably clean. He had three Cy Youngs and a MVP by 1991, when he was just 28. He didn't need to cheat to become rich and famous.

Maybe it was ego, maybe jealousy, maybe insecurity. It hardly matters now that his deal with the devil just came painfully due.

There is a forgivable element to some of the other names. Baseball is a global game now, which is why there are too many factors involved – a chance to leave third-world poverty for cash-flush America – to ever end the lure of doping.

Clemens has no such excuse.

The only surprise here for anyone paying attention was that Mitchell actually caught him.

For years Bonds supporters have pointed the finger at Clemens as a sign of a media (and racial) double standard. Their guy was getting crucified daily, while Clemens was getting standing ovations and new contracts.

But until now there was never a credible link to performance-enhancing drugs. There were rumors, broad-based speculation and a tenuous mention in the Jason Grimsley affidavit. But Bonds was caught up in a federal investigation into BALCO, a prison term for Victor Conte and a mountain of other evidence.

Call it Clemens' good fortune, but there was only so much you could say. Not any longer.

Anyone who spent years spewing contempt at Bonds needs to do the same to Clemens, because there is no difference between them.

They are just two guys who had it all, foolishly went for more, and have now lost everything.

Welcome to America's pastime, pass the peanuts and cracker jacks.

Does not Suprised me for How long he been going for

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BM_MAN

Does not Suprised me for How long he been going for

---

yep

{ Year after year he peddled the same garbage, Roger Clemens was so dominant for so long because he simply outworked everyone. }

Agree, all those stories of how he worked out his arm by dragging it thru barrels of rice etc...
always reminded me of tales of Walter Paytons extreme workouts.

I recall seeing the Texas Longhorns play in the college ws.
I pulled for them strictly because of 2 guys i thought were great and would make the bigs. Schiraldi and Clemens.
I used to feel LUCKY to have noticed him at that time and
to have the opportunity to watch a player i "pegged" as a big leaguer develop into a potential hofer.

Now i just feel like a tourist who got conned at a 3 card monte.

seeing todd hundleys name doesnt exactly help, either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeetDaMets

e.

seeing todd hundleys name doesnt exactly help, either.

---

Yeah, in 1997 or 1998 he had a Huge Breakout Year in HR.

I wonder how he did that:rolleyes:

I am sick of PED polls. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BM_MAN

I wonder how he did that:rolleyes:

---

I'm sure it was just the result of all the time he put in on his
Mega-workouts with the "Johnny Bench - Batter Up" machine.

None of the available answers even actually does answer the question asked... except for the last one. The question is posed about two individual players, but the answers lump all players into two groups.

No way to answer the question, so, no response from me.

I am sick of PED polls and find Clemens denial interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RickD

I am sick of PED polls and find Clemens denial interesting.

---

i saw a rumor he is planning on suing Mitchell and MLB for 1 billion dollars...

Good. Mitchell is also a compromised investigator IMO.

I agree that pitchers using PEDs is equally bad as hitters using PEDs, but don't necessarily agree with the unstated assumption that the evidence against Bonds and Clemens (or against any 2 individual players) is equally compelling.

This report was maybe the biggest waste of time in the history of baseball. It's all "he said, she said" accusations. I am to believe a locker room attendent's word as gold.
The way the statements were given also sounded fishey to me. "Injected Clemens buttocks 2 to 6 times." ??? There is no way a man would not have a pretty vivid memory of something of this magnitude.
This report has done nothing except ruin legacies and give some water cooler talk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tapey1brad

This report was maybe the biggest waste of time in the history of baseball. This report has done nothing except ruin legacies and give some water cooler talk.

---

Look, the players ruined their own legacies by taking PED's in the first place, but I disagree about the effect it has on the history or baseball. I think it has a huge effect. The record books are tainted. Even if you put an asterisk next to every players name, it's still putting out the message to children that it is okay to cheat. You will still be voted into the HOF and your record will stand at the top of the books. Baseball history and future depends largely upon what happens here. Yet another scar that fans will have to endure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tapey1brad

This report was maybe the biggest waste of time in the history of baseball. It's all "he said, she said" accusations. I am to believe a locker room attendent's word as gold. The way the statements were given also sounded fishey to me. "Injected Clemens buttocks 2 to 6 times." ??? There is no way a man would not have a pretty vivid memory of something of this magnitude. This report has done nothing except ruin legacies and give some water cooler talk.

---

Btw, great job at parroting the latest sports pundit to weight in on the subject. You should probably read some dissenting view other than Jayson Stark about the debacle.

Quote:

---

seeing todd hundleys name doesnt exactly help, either.

---

He could have at least kept doing them after the Cubs signed him. He is to this day my most hated Cub ever, and that was before this report.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bmoseley07

Look, the players ruined their own legacies by taking PED's in the first place

---

The players named in the report did not necessarily all take PED's. The evidence against some of them is completely hearsay and very flimsy.

Quote:

---

but I disagree about the effect it has on the history or baseball. I think it has a huge effect.

---

I don't see where tapey1brad said that it didn't have a huge effect, just that, it was a waste of time and has a negative effect.

Quote:

---

The record books are tainted.

---

If you don't believe that records have always been being tainted in someway by cheating, throughout history,than you're fooling yourself.

Why do steroids taint the record books more than amphetamines?

Quote:

---

Even if you put an asterisk next to every players name, it's still putting out the message to children that it is okay to cheat.

---

They're looking into the steroid mess. Punishments now exist. How is that saying "It's okay to cheat." Maybe 10 years ago that was the message being given out, you know, when the MLB willingly turned a blind eye to steroid use...but not now.

Quote:

---

Btw, great job at parroting the latest sports pundit to weight in on the subject. You should probably read some dissenting view other than Jayson Stark about the debacle.

---

Stark's view is actually rather accurate. The evidence against a lot of the players is extremely flimsy and would not hold up in court, yet we're taking everything in the report has 100% fact, and it may not, necessarily, be completley true.

I think this report is very self-serving to baseball as a whole and Selig will use it as a "see we are doing something" type thing to hold off a real investigation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RickD

I think this report is very self-serving to baseball as a whole and Selig will use it as a "see we are doing something" type thing to hold off a real investigation.

---

amen!

Congress doesn't seem too thrilled with this report either, and BTW, Jose Canseco supposedly "can't believe that Alex Rodriguez' name isn't in there.".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by robinhoodnik

Congress doesn't seem too thrilled with this report either, and BTW, Jose Canseco supposedly "can't believe that Alex Rodriguez' name isn't in there.".

---

Well, of course jose's ticked...this could adversely affect the sales of his next book!

Well it steals the thunder of his new book for sure. He should have gotten it out before the Mitchell Report!

Does anyone really think that this means much. Most of the players named aren't even in the league. The current players are all names we have time and again. Yet, still the most glaring part of the report is that there is little or no proof of anything. Just hear say and circumstantial evidense.

Curt Schilling today on WEEI told Jose Canseco that he didn't even belong on the same field with him. He wasn't a major league player since he cheated to get there, and that he couldn't even hold his jock strap.

Will the Rocket make the HOF Now?

Who knows.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

we're taking everything in the report has 100% fact, and it may not, necessarily, be completley true.

---

We are? We who? I'm sure not.* Did you read my earlier comment?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dps

We are? We who? I'm sure not.* Did you read my earlier comment?

---

By "we" I was more referring to the fans/media/etc as a whole, not individuals. I know there's many people that aren't, but overall, it seems like most people are.

Interesting

eh... not to me. Isn't there anything else we can talk about?
*sigh*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ohms_law

eh... not to me. Isn't there anything else we can talk about?
*sigh*

---

anymore jericho episodes forth coming?

February 12th.
http://www.cbs.com/primetime/jericho/

:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ohms_law

February 12th.
http://www.cbs.com/primetime/jericho/

:)

---

cool, hey did I mention that on this past Sat I flew into San Jose Int airport and saw the team plane for the Texas Rangers?? as you know San Jose is just a stones throw away from Oakland and San Fran....

Nifty. Did you take a picture?
:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ohms_law

Nifty. Did you take a picture?
:)

---

I wanted to but my camera was in my bag! I had half a mind to drive back by the run way on my way out to take one but the fiancee and kid were tired and hungry...

Ah, too bad. I've been there with the wife and kid though, so I understand completely.
:)

I can tell you the exact year he started using. During the 1995 offseason. Just look at his numbers. He was often injured starting in 1993 to 1995 and posted lowly numbers. Well low numbers for Clemens.

1993 - (missed 5 starts, 11-14 4.46 ERA)
1994 - (missed 9 starts, 9-7 2.85 ERA)
1995 - (missed 11 starts, 10-5 4.18 ERA)

Boston (GM Dan Duquette) figured he was getting old and would probably be injury plagued the rest of his career. He was even quoted to say "Clemens is in the twilight of his career."

Obviously when you had the career Clemens has had up to that point it hurts to spend your whole career with the club only to be called out and say your no longer the man you once was. And If I was Clemens and had that competitiveness in me, I would want to find anyway possible to ressurect my career just to shove it in Duquettes face. Which he found his answer in PED's.

And another thing for the critics, name me one pitcher that pitched this brutal in a string of 3 seasons to come back to greatness. Its 99% the same story with all pitchers. Your either once a bum and become great (i.e. Dave Stewart, Chris Carpenter.) or your once great and become a bum, (Orel Hershiser, Fernando Valenzeula) but there is no in between where your great, then you suck, then you return to greatness. I cant think of one pitcher besides Clemens.

There you have it folks, my argument, seperate the bs from the apple butter and you got to be a ***** to think Clemens did what he did natural.

M-o-r-o-n censored?? cmon.

That word started a nasty little fight not too long ago, and its no longer a word that is used here.

It used to refer to people that had a mental handicap or mentally deficiency.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reade

That word started a nasty little fight not too long ago, and its no longer a word that is used here.

It used to refer to people that had a mental handicap or mentally deficiency.

---

how bout the word naive? Would that be better? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ragecage

I can tell you the exact year he started using. During the 1995 offseason.

---

That's not what his trainer says.

Quote:

---

Just look at his numbers.

---

You can't just "look at his numbers" and determine if a player did steroids. We don't know just what steroids do for numbers. Hank Aaron had by far his best season at age 37. Does that mean he did steroids?

Quote:

---

And another thing for the critics, name me one pitcher that pitched this brutal in a string of 3 seasons to come back to greatness.

---

Woah. Brutal? ERA+'s from 1993 to 1995 were 104, 177, and 116. Then 139 in 1996. Sure, it wasn't his all-time greatness, but every good pitcher has had some fairly average seasons. His 1994 was really really really really good, despite missing starts. His 1993 and 1995 were above average. This is far from "brutal."

Quote:

---

Its 99% the same story with all pitchers. Your either once a bum and become great (i.e. Dave Stewart, Chris Carpenter.) or your once great and become a bum, (Orel Hershiser, Fernando Valenzeula) but there is no in between where your great, then you suck, then you return to greatness. I cant think of one pitcher besides Clemens.

---

I can't think of anybody off the top of my head, but I find it hard to believe that never has any pitcher in the history of the game gone from good, to average, to good (maybe not for the length that Clemens returned to be great, until he was 45, but surely, there's somebody that was really good, had a string of a couple average or so seasons, and then went back to being good for a couple years). If I find somebody, I'll come back.