A-Roids?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

he's not going to change his opinion rage, regardless of how much information you throw here. its become a shouting match of which you can't win. time to hang it up.

---

This is not an opinion. The game has always been riddled with players using and experimenting with drugs in an effort to enhance their performance. There were no "good old days". Today's players aren't evil people trying to undermine the "integrity of the game." That integrity never existed. It's a utopian view people wish existed. People can continue living in their fantasy worlds where the stars of the past were beacons of everything right with the world, if they wish, but it's just that, a fantasy world, and not reality.

It's an opinion that steroids are worse than amphetamines, scuffing the ball, etc., sure. I disagree because we do not know, but if you want to believe one way or the other, fine, that's your prerogative. However, steroids themselves aren't new to the game, and that's not an opinion. They've been a part of the game for nearly half a century. Anybody that wants to think that steroid use in baseball didn't start until the late 80's with Jose Canseco is demonstrating extreme naivety. Furthermore, Players of the past would without a doubt have used today's drugs if they were available to them. Just because they didn't have access to the same drugs as today's players does not make them better people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ragecage

I agree to disagree with you HGM, I see what you are saying, but I dont feel it. Sorry.

---

So, just to be perfectly clear, you think that baseball players in the past were better people than today's players, had better moral fibers, and despite the fact that those players did everything they had available to them in efforts to enhance their performance, you don't think they'd have gone beyond if they could have?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ragecage

I agree to disagree with you HGM, I see what you are saying, but I dont feel it. Sorry.

---

it is a circular argument Rage --- you & I feel that "past" drug taking was LESS prominent & harmful than today's organized (Mafia like anyone *joke*) usage of a federally banned substance that pharmaceutical companies knowingly produce to be undetectable in tests & thus not only is banned but they try to circumvent the testing programme .

HGM believes that it isn't & that all periods should be considered alike - he won't change his opinion,nor will you & neither will I --- all this leads to verbal diarrhoea & tit for tat posting.

Lets just say that we all agree to disagree....;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

So, just to be perfectly clear, you think that baseball players in the past were better people than today's players, had better moral fibers, and despite the fact that those players did everything they had available to them in efforts to enhance their performance, you don't think they'd have gone beyond if they could have?

---

Of course, but what they could have done doesnt seem as bad to me as steroids. I dont know, maybe my upbringing makes me feel that way. My dad did speed all the time just so he can put in a days work when he was working, while my mother did the same.

I guess one way of comfort for me was to grow immune to the fact they did those things, and thats why im not as outraged about greenies as I am roids. Weird logic, i know, but it is what it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX

it is a circular argument Rage --- you & I feel that "past" drug taking was LESS prominent & harmful than today's organized (Mafia like anyone *joke*) usage of a federally banned substance that pharmaceutical companies knowingly produce to be undetectable in tests & thus not only is banned but they try to circumvent the testing programme .

HGM believes that it isn't & that all periods should be considered alike - he won't change his opinion,nor will you & neither will I --- all this leads to verbal diarrhoea & tit for tat posting.

Lets just say that we all agree to disagree....;)

---

im trying to, HGM isnt letting me off that easy :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ragecage

Of course, but what they could have done doesnt seem as bad to me as steroids. I dont know, maybe my upbringing makes me feel that way. My dad did speed all the time just so he can put in a days work when he was working, while my mother did the same.

I guess one way of comfort for me was to grow immune to the fact they did those things, and thats why im not as outraged about greenies as I am roids. Weird logic, i know, but it is what it is.

---

I agree with HGM on this topic, Players have ALWAYS tied to break the rules/ stretch the rules/ find Loopholes. Just because we have 10 stations dedicated to only sports news we make them even more prominence now.

And if people think the Steroids Era stared in the late '80s they are fooling themselves. Maybe a higer % were doing them in the 90's, but that would only signal that people are seeing a benefit -real or perceived- that others are enjoying from them.

On a note of to why players do this -- ESPN asked the question; "would you take steroids/PEDs if if guaranteed you a 250 million dollar contract?'

63% of the people said they would and the other 37 apparently lied.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gRYFYN1

63% of the people said they would and the other 37 apparently lied.

---

Hehe, yep ! ! Anyone saying they wouldn't try to skirt the rules for that kind of money is not being honest with the pollster, themselves, or both. But I'd bet well over 90% of us posting on these forums, if in a position of a possible $10 million a year versus stocking grocery shelves or driving a bus, would try things we might not even admit to ever wanting to try.

Most of us would consider murder to be the ultimate "sin", yet for a real $100 million dollars, more folks would consider doing it than would admit it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX

it is a circular argument Rage --- you & I feel that "past" drug taking was LESS prominent & harmful than today's organized (Mafia like anyone *joke*) usage of a federally banned substance that pharmaceutical companies knowingly produce to be undetectable in tests & thus not only is banned but they try to circumvent the testing programme.

HGM believes that it isn't & that all periods should be considered alike - he won't change his opinion,nor will you & neither will I --- all this leads to verbal diarrhoea & tit for tat posting.

---

If this was the environment in the past, the players of then would surely have done the same as those of today did. Again, just because they lived in different times, had access to different things, and the things weren't as advanced as they are today, does not make them better human beings.

I'm not saying that steroids aren't as harmful or whatever as the drugs of the past. That's pretty fricken' obvious. Of course today's drugs are "stronger." The amphetamines of the past weren't up to par in terms of benefit or harm as the amphetamines of today are, either.

I'm saying that the way we judge the players shouldn't be different. Today's players aren't morally bankrupt compared to past player's. They just simply have a different environment and different opportunities. If you think that the fact that Willie Mays did not have access to designer steroids but instead used the strongest drugs available to him means that he's a better person than someone who had stronger drugs available and used them, well, that's just insane. Players have always used the strongest available drugs in an effort to enhance their performance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ragecage

Of course, but what they could have done doesnt seem as bad to me as steroids.

---

The point is that if they could have done steroids, they would have. They used whatever drug was available to them in order to enhance their performance. If there were stronger drugs available than those they used, do you think they would not have used those stronger drugs?

Quote:

---

I dont know, maybe my upbringing makes me feel that way. My dad did speed all the time just so he can put in a days work when he was working, while my mother did the same.

---

Without amphetamines, your dad's performance as a worker would've been lesser. They enhanced his performance. Given that you have basically firsthand experience with it, that should show you the benefits that a player could get through amphetamine use.

Thankfully, Congress has no plans to hold hearings on A-Rod, circumventing the hope of Senator Blowhard Cummings.

Quote:

---

The country’s economy takes priority over baseball’s drug policy, said Representative Edolphus Towns, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

“The American people need leaders who will focus on stemming job losses and getting credit to flow in the marketplace before hearing from yet another person who cheated both himself and the game of baseball,” Towns, a New York Democrat, said in a statement.

---

Yay logic! I'm glad Towns replaced Henry Waxman as the head of this committee. Waxman would be foaming at the mouth like Cummings for a chance to interrogate another baseball player.

Tejada charged with lying to Congress


Didn't feel it needed it's own thread, but I'm positive someone else will think it does

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by etothep

Tejada charged with lying to Congress


Didn't feel it needed it's own thread, but I'm positive someone else will think it does

---

It probably does deserve its own thread because it's a completely different story. And boy, is there a lot to say on it....But, yeah, let's keep it in a separate thread (if anybody wishes to start it).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

It probably does deserve its own thread because it's a completely different story. And boy, is there a lot to say on it....But, yeah, let's keep it in a separate thread (if anybody wishes to start it).

---

can't there just be a roids thread? as opposed to a new thread fr each & every single roids story?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by etothep

can't there just be a roids thread? as opposed to a new thread fr each & every single roids story?

---

I suppose there COULD be. Myself, I'd prefer one thread per "story", more in the sense of one thread for Barry Bonds stuff...one for Tejada...one for A-Rod...etc. For example, I think that the 3 or 4 A-Rod threads are better off being in one thread, but I think Miguel Tejada stuff should be in its own thread.

hence why i don't frequent sports talk much now....too many needless threads to sort through (multiple roid threads, a thread for every team & every signing or trade getting it's own thread)


oh well, carry on