A-Roids?

[HoustonGM]

Those are pretty extreme quotes right there. After marinating in this topic for a day or so, I come to the conclusion that whoever does great, are probably on something. Ill just try to enjoy it for what it is and just hold the judgement that none of these players are anything compared to the players that played back in the day.

"Back in the day"? When was that? When the drug of choice was animal testicle extract? Or when players were speed junkies? Or when players of the 1960's and 70's were experimenting with steroids?

Sorry, this "back in the day" of a pristine, clean game that people talk about, exists only in their imagination.

I know one thing, I wont spend another dollar on this business.

Really? You'll never buy another piece of baseball memoribilia? Never go to another baseball game? Never purchase another baseball video game? Fine, let's say thats true. I assume then that you're also going to stop watching baseball on TV, never turn on MLB Network, etc. right?

As a kid my heroes were Sports stars such as Mark Spitz,Franz Beckenbauer & baseball guys like Greenwell/Boggs etc unfortuntaly all this has tainted my heroes & what I consider as a hero.....it is like when I discovered that Father Christmas was not real but just my dad in a silly costume --- simply put dreams crushed & I feel worst for all those 8-18 year olds who held A-Rod or Roger the Dodger as their icons.

Reality's a *****, huh?

The heroes of your childhood were no better than the heroes of today. Face it. Athletes in every sport have been doing anything they can to win since the concept of winning was created. Athletes in every sport have been experimenting with performance-enhancing drugs since who the hell knows when, but it's certainly not a recent phenomenon.

[FRENCHREDSOX]

The heroes of your childhood were no better than the heroes of today. Face it. Athletes in every sport have been doing anything they can to win since the concept of winning was created. Athletes in every sport have been experimenting with performance-enhancing drugs since who the hell knows when, but it's certainly not a recent phenomenon.

Yes you are correct that SOME Heroes of yesteryear were cheats but maybe,& I do admit to some naivety here,the extent was less than today.

Of course,cheats existed from Corking bats or roughing balls etc etc but (again my personal belief) the crimes were less malicious & less widespread.

Baseball,unlike certain other sports,has condoned this practice & it is this aspect that annoys me --- as I said in an earlier post when the Union,MLB & owners 'turn a blind eye' to steroid use then it can only lead to what has been happening,as you rightly say,for years.

HGM how many cheats were their in the past ? How many today ? The numbers show that cheating (& its condonement,sadly) has increased & what was the exception in the 50's/60's or 70's became the NORM in the 90's & 2000's....Heck the Gary Sheffield testimony is the best example of this,he said he went to Barry Bonds BECAUSE of what Barry had achieved using "Clear" & "cream" & thus used them himself to possibly improve or maintain his play.

That in my eyes is simply logical for the players (because of the contracts they earn or try to earn) but is total madness for a so-called professional sport.


Yet most SPORTS have tried to minimize cheating from Soccer to Athletics to the even maligned Cycling by testing players randomly & trying to the maximum to irradicate the cheats.


CAUGHT Cheats,such as Marion Jones or Vinoukorov,are banned from their sports for 1 or 2 years (or more),their contracts are reneged,their medals & achievements removed & their team's wins (in team sports) overturned & in extreme cases the teams are BANNED from sport or retrograded.

Examples include Astana or Barloworld in the Tour de France,Marseille being retrograded to Division 2 in 1994 or Juventus of Turin in 2006.Does this stop cheating ? No,but at least the cheats know that their "crimes" will be punished if caught & teams' equally have an interest in not cheating as they would lose Millions in lost sponsorship & playing at a second tier level.

In each of these cases the LEAGUES or the Governing body of the Sport took action whereas in Baseball's case it seems it is the opposite THEY not only did not take action to remove the problem BUT actually condoned it & allowed its proliferation by non testing,non banning & worst of all resigning known users & dealers to lucrative extensions & contracts.

[HoustonGM]

Yes you are correct that SOME Heroes of yesteryear were cheats but maybe,& I do admit to some naivety here,the extent was less than today.

That's a VERY naive stance, I think. The only difference is the size of the media and the topics they choose to cover.

Of course,cheats existed from Corking bats or roughing balls etc etc but (again my personal belief) the crimes were less malicious & less widespread.

I'm not even referring to those types of cheating. Using performance-enhancing drugs, or more specifically, using drugs in an attempt to enhance performance, has been in baseball since the 19th century.

HGM how many cheats were their in the past ? How many today ? The numbers show that cheating (& its condonement,sadly) has increased & what was the exception in the 50's/60's or 70's became the NORM in the 90's & 2000's....

Really? There's numbers on how many players cheated in the 50's, 60's, and 70's? Please, do tell, because as far as I know, we don't even have numbers for the 1990's, let alone the last half-century. And, according to player accounts, the crap was rampant back then too. Ever read "Ball Four"? Ever hear of Tom House?

In each of these cases the LEAGUES or the Governing body of the Sport took action whereas in Baseball's case it seems it is the opposite THEY not only did not take action to remove the problem BUT actually condoned it & allowed its proliferation by non testing,non banning & worst of all resigning known users & dealers to lucrative extensions & contracts.

No doubt, which is why I find it pathetic that we crucify the players while giving everybody else a complete pass.

[HoustonGM]

Those are pretty extreme quotes right there. After marinating in this topic for a day or so, I come to the conclusion that whoever does great, are probably on something.

Also, just curious, why is this limited to only those that do great? If we've learned anything in the past year or so, it's that the players that took steroids span the entire spectrum of players, from minor league scrubs to major league scrubs to bench players to solid players to good players to stars. If you're going to conclude that every great player is on something, the only logical conclusion is to conclude the same for EVERY player.

[FRENCHREDSOX]

That's a VERY naive stance, I think. The only difference is the size of the media and the topics they choose to cover.


I'm not even referring to those types of cheating. Using performance-enhancing drugs, or more specifically, using drugs in an attempt to enhance performance, has been in baseball since the 19th century.


Really? There's numbers on how many players cheated in the 50's, 60's, and 70's? Please, do tell, because as far as I know, we don't even have numbers for the 1990's, let alone the last half-century. And, according to player accounts, the crap was rampant back then too. Ever read "Ball Four"? Ever hear of Tom House?


No doubt, which is why I find it pathetic that we crucify the players while giving everybody else a complete pass.

It is a circular argument HGM the facts are that PEDs & their supply are far more widespread today than in the past....companies like BALCO were created with the specific aim of supplying PEDs & it is since the "Sports" networks contracts & I-net when Sports became a Billion $ industry rather than a Million $ industry that proliferation has occurred.

PEDs (& its kin) are expensive to say the least (check the prices yourself) & the players (again a supposition NOT a certainty) of the past had lesser salaries than today,even pro rata & thus were less likely to invest in physical drug taking.

Yes Amphets existed & were wide spread,yes Babe Ruth used sheep testicles hormones but these were marginal cases --- today (& I mean from the 90's on) the diversity & availability is multiply large - the players E-mail orders,use I net to buy from Mexico or Brazil etc etc 30 or 40 years ago the steroids (or their equivalent) were bought from "shady" doctors & so on.....now you don't even need to see one!Today,Pharmaceutical companies MAKE drugs to be untraceable!! BALCO's cream & clear is a perfect example but as this shows cheating is legitimized which is non sensical IMO but a derivative of the system now used were WINNING at any costs is the norm.


I honestly think that cheating in Baseball has extrapolated in the last 20 years to the point were players/teams & the MLB no longer EVEN consider themselves as cheats.40 years ago Pete Rose was a cheat because he gambled but NOT because he used PEDs....

[HoustonGM]

PEDs (& its kin) are expensive to say the least (check the prices yourself) & the players (again a supposition NOT a certainty) of the past had lesser salaries than today,even pro rata & thus were less likely to invest in physical drug taking.

The drugs cost differently back then too. Society in the '60's was hopped up on drugs of all sorts, with everybody from the poor to the rich using them - baseball players included.

Yes Amphets existed & were wide spread,yes Babe Ruth used sheep testicles hormones but these were marginal cases ---

You can't say that amphetamine use was widespread, but a marginal case. The fact is that amphetamine use was widespread. Steroid use/experimentation, as well, has been widespread since the '60's. Arguing over the extent of it will simply be fruitless because, just like with the question of what these drugs do for performance, we don't and can't know how many did what in the past. All we have is eyewitness accounts, which attest to PED's being widespread for decades.

today (& I mean from the 90's on) the diversity & availability is multiply large - the players E-mail orders,use I net to buy from Mexico or Brazil etc etc 30 or 40 years ago the steroids (or their equivalent) were bought from "shady" doctors & so on.....now you don't even need to see one!

So? That doesn't change the fact that the game has never been pure and drug-free.

I'd really like to know what makes you feel bad for those for whom A-Rod was a hero, but not for those whose hero was Willie Mays (an amphetamine user and supplier) or Hank Aaron (an amphetamine user). Why are today's drug users demons, but the drug users of the past worshipped?

Also, let's assume for a second that what you say about the extent of the problem is true (there's more of it now), and that these drugs do improve performance. If those two things are true, than those players that did drugs when it was less widespread were worse in terms of competitive advantage, and thus their achievements discounted more, than those that did it when everybody did it. Why? Because the more players using the stuff, the less of an "edge" it gives.

[FRENCHREDSOX]

The drugs cost differently back then too. Society in the '60's was hopped up on drugs of all sorts, with everybody from the poor to the rich using them - baseball players included.


You can't say that amphetamine use was widespread, but a marginal case. The fact is that amphetamine use was widespread. Steroid use/experimentation, as well, has been widespread since the '60's. Arguing over the extent of it will simply be fruitless because, just like with the question of what these drugs do for performance, we don't and can't know how many did what in the past. All we have is eyewitness accounts, which attest to PED's being widespread for decades.


So? That doesn't change the fact that the game has never been pure and drug-free.

I'd really like to know what makes you feel bad for those for whom A-Rod was a hero, but not for those whose hero was Willie Mays (an amphetamine user and supplier) or Hank Aaron (an amphetamine user). Why are today's drug users demons, but the drug users of the past worshipped?

Also, let's assume for a second that what you say about the extent of the problem is true (there's more of it now), and that these drugs do improve performance. If those two things are true, than those players that did drugs when it was less widespread were worse in terms of competitive advantage, and thus their achievements discounted more, than those that did it when everybody did it. Why? Because the more players using the stuff, the less of an "edge" it gives.

I never said that the sport was drug free,lol.I said that in the past,it appears the usage was less.....during my child hood (many moons ago,sadly) the usage seemed lesser.

As you rightly point out there were no testing so it is difficult to ascertain the actual % of usage.However,there does appear (& it seems to bear out testimony of users today) that from a marginalized/under the counter system of the 50's-80's the usage changed to an organized-professional & TOLERATED system in the late '90's & 2000's.

Where teams' hired "dealers" for their players (eg Radomski or Brian McNamee),where Pharmaceutical companies developed drugs specifically for sports athletes & even went further developed drugs to be non traceable when testing became manditory.Baseball has become professional in every aspect but this area & if anything the collusion has undermined the respect that fans' have for the players but also the sport in general.One scandal followed by another has not,IMO,endeared the average Joe (myself included) towards baseball & its hierachy & again IMO these steroids allegations & non published reports of the "104 positives" reminds me of how Cycling suffered in the early 2000's with its own drug taking scandals.Unlike the UCI,which has gone out of its way to "clean" up the sport Baseball seemingly is content on having an industry where cheating is allowed & even,indirectly,encouraged.This IMHO is a dangerous path for the sport & industry as fans may feel more & more betrayed & possibly will divert the attentions to other sports (as they did in the 80's).


Lastly,the "edge" of PEDs artificially changes the results obtained & it is this aspect that tarnishes the sport....McGwire HR record is artificial as we don't know what he would have done without PED usage,the same for Bonds etc etc

You ask why A-Rod & co are stigmatised ? The answer is because of the money they earn & they obtained it through use of PEDs,Mays & co never earned 30 million for 1 season (or even the equivalent even if you remove inflation).


Since FA the salaries have extrapolated incredibly -- in 1979 was the first MILLION dollar contract,ten years later the 5 million threshold,& in 96 the 10 million....& in 2000 the 25 million threshold (A Rod).

[Jeffy25]

Since FA the salaries have extrapolated incredibly -- in 1979 was the first MILLION dollar contract,ten years later the 5 million threshold,& in 96 the 10 million....& in 2000 the 25 million threshold (A Rod).

Salaries have gone up at this rate for the last 50 years....100 million dollar contracts will be the norm one day.

[HoustonGM]

I never said that the sport was drug free,lol.I said that in the past,it appears the usage was less.....during my child hood (many moons ago,sadly) the usage seemed lesser.

"Seemed" is the key word. Of course it seemed less! NOBODY CARED.

As you rightly point out there were no testing so it is difficult to ascertain the actual % of usage.

Impossible, actually.

However,there does appear (& it seems to bear out testimony of users today) that from a marginalized/under the counter system of the 50's-80's the usage changed to an organized-professional & TOLERATED system in the late '90's & 2000's.

As opposed to a system which just ignored it? Okay?

Either way, this is not the fault of the players, who are bearing the complete blame in the media.

Lastly,the "edge" of PEDs artificially changes the results obtained & it is this aspect that tarnishes the sport....McGwire HR record is artificial as we don't know what he would have done without PED usage,the same for Bonds etc etc

And why isn't the same thing be applied to past drug users? The 660 HR hit by Willie Mays are artificial as we don't know what he would have done without PED usage. Right?

You ask why A-Rod & co are stigmatised ? The answer is because of the money they earn & they obtained it through use of PEDs,Mays & co never earned 30 million for 1 season (or even the equivalent even if you remove inflation).

Since FA the salaries have extrapolated incredibly -- in 1979 was the first MILLION dollar contract,ten years later the 5 million threshold,& in 96 the 10 million....& in 2000 the 25 million threshold (A Rod).

Oh, so absolute, utter irrationality, got it.

Baseball players make more now because baseball as a business is now more profitable. The players of the past don't deserve less scorn for doing the same thing that players of today do just because we, the fans, have made the game more profitable. I understand why people feel that way, because the disparity between the salaries of players and regular people is greater now than in the past and people are jealous, but that doesn't make it any less irrational and wrong.

And, besides, I was asking why YOU feel bad for A-Rod "worshipers" (for lack of a better word) but not Mays/Aaron "worshipers."

[FRENCHREDSOX]

Salaries have gone up at this rate for the last 50 years....100 million dollar contracts will be the norm one day.

Nope not 50 years simply since the '70s as shown here but the extrapolation curve vastly increased post 79

[Jeffy25]

in your opinions: does this make the likes of Albert Pujols, Ryan Howard, Matt Holidays of the world look better? or is this just another story?

to me, just another story

[Jeffy25]

Nope not 50 years simply since the '70s as shown here but the extrapolation curve vastly increased post 79

haha, ok

[FRENCHREDSOX]

Oh, so absolute, utter irrationality, got it.

Baseball players make more now because baseball as a business is now more profitable. The players of the past don't deserve less scorn for doing the same thing that players of today do just because we, the fans, have made the game more profitable. I understand why people feel that way, because the disparity between the salaries of players and regular people is greater now than in the past and people are jealous, but that doesn't make it any less irrational and wrong.

And, besides, I was asking why YOU feel bad for A-Rod "worshipers" (for lack of a better word) but not Mays/Aaron "worshipers."

HGM it is not irrational it is simply human nature.

As I said I feel bad for A Rod worshippers simply because he was "labelled" during the Bonds & McGwire controversy as Mr Clean/Saviour of Baseball.

Mays/Aaron (again IMO) used less refined PEDs I assume....it was less medicalized/organized than today's usage whose aim was/is to undermine the testing system as agreed upon in the CBA.Again I am not defending their use,heck no,but A Rod claims to have used it from 2000 to 2003 when it WAS banned federally & if my recollection (& I assume you will correct me if I am wrong ) by the MLB.He knowingly cheated & knowingly used substances that were banned UNLESS used with medical supervision.

[HoustonGM]

HGM it is not irrational it is simply human nature.

Human nature isn't always rational.

As I said I feel bad for A Rod worshippers simply because he was "labelled" during the Bonds & McGwire controversy as Mr Clean/Saviour of Baseball.

And Mays and Aaron are "labeled" as clean players that played the right way.

Mays/Aaron (again IMO) used less refined PEDs I assume....

Sure, but that makes it okay? If they had access to better PEDs, you think they wouldn't have used them?

it was less medicalized/organized than today's usage whose aim was to undermine the testing system as agreed upon in the CBA.

I don't think you can aim to undermine something that doesn't exist.

Again I am not defending their use,heck no,but A Rod claims to have used it from 2000 to 2003 when it WAS banned federally & if my recollection (& I assume you will correct me if I am wrong ) by the MLB.

It was banned by the MLB only in the sense that it was illegal in the United States. MLB had no policy on it, no testing procedures, and no punishments.

I heard a great analogy the other day. Steroids were banned in baseball like marijuana is banned at a Grateful Dead concert.

[OldFatGuy]

Everyone is entitled to their opinions, and if they wish to abandon baseball because of this, then by all means do so. Enjoy other sports, or, since they likely aren't pure either, perhaps you could get into reading or writing. Though if you're reading, better not look into the author's past much. You might get disappointed by some their behaviors as well.

I hope those that leave the game find enjoyment in something else, as life is much too hard and disappointing to not have some pleasures, so I do wish you the best. But please, if you can admit to wanting to leave the game, you should also be man enough to admit that this perception of the game is "less pure" today than some fantasy age years ago is just that, a fantasy.

In the 60's and 70's, the drug of choice was speed. And at some point I'll wager my last dollar that nearly every great we've heard of used it at least once. Most more. Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, Frank Robinson, Brooks Robinson, Sandy Koufax, Bob Gibson, Johnny Bench, Pete Rose, and the list goes on. You can believe they're all pure until the end of time, but believing it doesn't make it so.

Babe Ruth, the most famous name in baseball, broke the laws of this country so many times if he were ever held accountable, he'd have to live 5 lives to serve the time. In fact, he used to brag about breaking those laws. Not to mention rumors of other stuff he may/may not have done. And how many of those players from those times went out every night and broke the laws of our country, and supported organized crime by doing so???? Why, with their lifestyles and income, one could make a plausible case that were it not for ballplayers, organized crime may not have become near as big as it did. But that doesn't matter right? Fine, that's your right.

I love the game. Always have, from the first time my father threw me a ball and I tried to hit it with a bat, to the first time I smelled the grass and peanuts at the balllpark, to the faster paced, 30 channels of action on my DirectTV today. The game is pure, the players that play it not so much. Never have been. Because the players that play it are men, and like men in every other industry, they are imperfect.

And that's another reason to love the game IMO. When I see Manny loaf out if left or running to first I want to scream, then when I see him swing that bat like almost no other man alive and hit a pitch an inch off the ground soaring over the left center field wall, I want jump in my TV screen and touch him, because he must be a God.

When Roger Clemens throws a broken bat at another player I want to wring his neck, then when as a 40 something (whether on drugs or not, once you get to be in your 40's you'll see) he's throwing strikes, with less velocity than he used to have but with just as much guts and guile and cleverness he works 7 innings of three hit ball against men half his age (many of whom are taking the same drugs), I marvel.

I could list a thousand reasons why I'm disappointed in baseball, and then start over and list a thousand more. And one could lists millions of reasons to not like the players that play them, the owners that own them, and the umpires that call them, because they are all men.

But when I hear those words for the first time in spring, "Play Ball", and see the spit, and hear the crack of the bat, all those thousands and millions of negatives float out of my old memory, and for just a little while, I'm a kid again. And at my age, that is priceless. I'll love this game until I die. And I'll miss those of you that choose to abandon it. Good luck.