Sosa tested positive in 2003 per NY Times

[OleMissCub]

Slammy, the resident Houdini of the juicer crew has finally had the first bit of real evidence against him established.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/17/sports/baseball/17doping.html?_r=1&ref=sports

This was the same "anonymous" test that got A-Rod.

[Ace Venom]

Looks like no Hall of Fame for him. It's a shame.

[GiambiJuice]

This is SHOCKING!!!!!


sorry, I'm feeling sarcastic today..

[Ace Venom]

Having to deal with potential perjury charges are more of an issue here. Sosa honestly doesn't have to admit to anything because his best defense at this point is claiming it was a false positive. However, I don't see that working. These tests were supposed to be anonymous and it seems a little conveniently timed with his retirement announcement. In that, he said he would wait calmly for his induction into the Hall of Fame. Surprise! Another name on the list gets leaked and it turns out to be Sammy Sosa. What a pattern. I guess they're going to wait a few months before they leak another big name.

[KCGHOST]

Certainly no surprise here. His best defense is a simple "No Comment". You can't fight the blaggards and making excuses only makes it worse.

[DodgerBlue8188]

I really don't think these foreign born players care too much about being honest when having to comment while being on oath.

[deadball-era-rules]

That's makes two down, 102 to go.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Anyone watching the game as long as I had to raise eyebrows when hitters begin having 60 and 70 home run seasons so quick, it was quick and they do it in such a short span of time.
As a long time fan I was a bit sick watching the summer of love, hug-hug, Sammy and Mac two phonys, something is not right here, then Barry, now all the suspicion over the years is coming to light, all the dirt.

Roger Maris and 61 is looking better all the time.
Let me head off those who will now come back with the.........what about Roger, how do we know, well we don't.
Even though I like some others, years ago thought some were users I always closed by saying, what I think does not matter, they are all innocent until there is proof.
Same for Roger, 61 is really looking good.

[rockin500]

*shrug* doesnt really bother me. I've been pretty consistent on that all along. Baseball is both athletics AND entertainment. and he certainly provided the latter.

[SilentKiller]

That's makes two down, 102 to go.

I have the same sentiments.

[ol' aches and pains]

Hate to say I told you so, but...:waving

[rockin500]

Hate to say I told you so, but...:waving
THOSE arent the pictures you should be comparing. comparing a person 20 years apart is not the right one, since a person can change naturally in that time frame. compare something like 22 and 27 or 28.

[ol' aches and pains]

THOSE arent the pictures you should be comparing. comparing a person 20 years apart is not the right one, since a person can change naturally in that time frame. compare something like 22 and 27 or 28.

I don't need to now, do I?

[The Splendid Splinter]

1990
http://imagehost.epier.com/3241/e51(1).jpg

1998
http://reds.enquirer.com/img/photos/1998/09/090198sosa_550x391.jpg

2005
http://artfiles.art.com/images/-/2005---Sammy-Sosa-Yelling-Photograph-C11812600.jpeg


there you go...

[keystone]

I kept wondering when his name was going to show up... I wonder why names keep dripping out of the faucet so slowly? For cryin' out loud, they've known about over a hundred players for a long time now. What's the game? :rant:

[rockin500]

there, thats more legitimate splinter.

[OleMissCub]

http://www.wisecamel.com/images/Sosa%20B%20and%20A%203.jpg

[Ace Venom]

I kept wondering when his name was going to show up... I wonder why names keep dripping out of the faucet so slowly? For cryin' out loud, they've known about over a hundred players for a long time now. What's the game? :rant:

It was a convenient story. His retirement announcement and talk of the Hall of Fame is what got his name leaked. Maybe the name wouldn't have been leaked had he not talked about retirement. Of course, outside of an admission from Sosa and an actual report, there's no way to verify it at this point. I'm not saying he's clean, but you'd have to prove that his name is actually on the list and if so, that it's not a false positive. I have my doubts that the Feds are going to go after Sosa for this one, but it wouldn't surprise me if they tried. Sosa obviously doesn't have to admit anything. A-Rod certainly didn't have to admit anything and unlike Sosa, he had no fear of perjury charges.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

THOSE arent the pictures you should be comparing. comparing a person 20 years apart is not the right one, since a person can change naturally in that time frame. compare something like 22 and 27 or 28.

Forget the pictures, I don't judge by pictures. I go by his numbers, he turned into Superman, how does this happen. Hitting 60 seldom accomplished and this guy does it 3 out of 4 years, need any more hints.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

*shrug* doesnt really bother me. I've been pretty consistent on that all along. Baseball is both athletics AND entertainment. and he certainly provided the latter.

Your easy to entertain and his entertaining may close the door on the HOF, was it all worth it Sammy.

[rockin500]

Your easy to entertain and his entertaining may close the door on the HOF, was it all worth it Sammy.
maybe so. but many people felt the same. he certainly entertained millions. baseball is reaping what they sowed. The powers that be knew that most people like offense, and that chicks truly do dig the long ball. and they looked the other way. everyone looked the other way back in the beginning. Its a bit hypocritical to be on the high horse, when all the signs were there back in the mid-late 90's that there was some suspicious behavior going on.

I'm worried about water getting into my condo, I'm worried about my job. I'm worried about my health. I'm NOT concerned with whether an athlete I liked was clean. I watch baseball (and football, which is more roided up than baseball could ever be) to get away from my everyday concerns, not worry about the other stuff.

I like wrestling (or i did until vince mcmahon forgot how to write good scripts) because its entertainment. yeah sure they are jacked up on the juice too, but its fun to watch.

Maybe I've just grown more cynical but when you expect people to be bad, you cant be surprised, and you cant really be saddened. It makes one appreciate the ones who do it clean more, but it doesnt take away from those who took shortcuts.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

maybe so. but many people felt the same. he certainly entertained millions. baseball is reaping what they sowed. The powers that be knew that most people like offense, and that chicks truly do dig the long ball. and they looked the other way. everyone looked the other way back in the beginning. Its a bit hypocritical to be on the high horse, when all the signs were there back in the mid-late 90's that there was some suspicious behavior going on.

I'm worried about water getting into my condo, I'm worried about my job. I'm worried about my health. I'm NOT concerned with whether an athlete I liked was clean. I watch baseball (and football, which is more roided up than baseball could ever be) to get away from my everyday concerns, not worry about the other stuff.

I like wrestling (or i did until vince mcmahon forgot how to write good scripts) because its entertainment. yeah sure they are jacked up on the juice too, but its fun to watch.

Maybe I've just grown more cynical but when you expect people to be bad, you cant be surprised, and you cant really be saddened. It makes one appreciate the ones who do it clean more, but it doesnt take away from those who took shortcuts.

Should baseball have put in place a testing program earlier, yes they should have. Lets remember the good old players union that stonewalled on some testing.

But the bottom line, there is no way out, in the end those that chose to go down that road shoulder 100 percent responsibility, not baseball, not the fans, it was their choice.

Sounds like the old "ghetto defense", yea I did wrong but go easy on me, look at the neigborhood I was in, look at what was going on around me.

Users, no excuse, no laying blame on others.

[NYMets523]

Certainly no surprise here. His best defense is a simple "No Comment". You can't fight the blaggards and making excuses only makes it worse.

You mean: "No tengo comentario"

[Ace Venom]

Like it or not, it was a reality of the time. It's not an excuse, but it was part of the game. I was a fan of Sosa, but being a fan won't make me stupid here. So he did a banned substance. Fine. Maybe amnesty would be a good idea for that list because this is obviously out of line to release names from an anonymous test and not even all at once. It keeps the story in the news and has you guessing who could possibly be next. I can about imagine that when Ken Griffey Jr. decides to retire and if he's on that list, a week later, boom! Headline: Ken Griffey Jr. tested positive back in 2003. :rolleyes: Or just ban every single one of the clowns that took steroids and pull a Ford Frick and say all records broken from 1985-2007 are considered separate records. Of course I don't support that, but I've read those comments at different places.

[bob]

With all these 90's/00's sluggers being dragged out of hiding its making Griffey seem better and better. Oner of only 4 hitters to have a legit 600 HR tally.

[rockin500]

Should baseball have put in place a testing program earlier, yes they should have. Lets remember the good old players union that stonewalled on some testing.

But the bottom line, there is no way out, in the end those that chose to go down that road shoulder 100 percent responsibility, not baseball, not the fans, it was their choice.

Sounds like the old "ghetto defense", yea I did wrong but go easy on me, look at the neigborhood I was in, look at what was going on around me.

Users, no excuse, no laying blame on others.

I include the union as part of the establishment in that because it made them money. a lot of money. So baseball establishment had no incentive at the time to be clean really and were acting as enablers when it comes to that stuff. And enablers are almost as much of a problem in these cases as the actual user. and are usually the reason a problem gets to be as much of a problem as it is.

In the end, steroid users arent any worse than people using other illegal drugs.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

I include the union as part of the establishment in that because it made them money. a lot of money. So baseball establishment had no incentive at the time to be clean really and were acting as enablers when it comes to that stuff. And enablers are almost as much of a problem in these cases as the actual user. and are usually the reason a problem gets to be as much of a problem as it is.

In the end, steroid users arent any worse than people using other illegal drugs.

What does this mean, OK no worse but when an athlete in any sport uses, he most likely will pay more. In this case baseball, it could hurt the chance at the HOF.

[rockin500]

What does this mean, OK no worse but when an athlete in any sport uses, he most likely will pay more. In this case baseball, it could hurt the chance at the HOF.
i dont disagree with you. I'm saying that I personally dont see it as one is any worse than the other.

[gman5431]

Sosa was on steroids? What?

NO way. I just dont believe it.






Seriously, why is this even news?

G Man

[Captain Cold Nose]

Sosa was on steroids? What?

NO way. I just dont believe it.






Seriously, why is this even news?

G Man

The continuing story of the death of the word anonymous.

[Ace Venom]

The continuing story of the death of the word anonymous.

If those same writers made as much of a deal about the steroid use in the NFL and Arnold Schwarzenegger's entire career being owed to past anabolic steroid use, I'd probably be inclined to take them a lot more seriously.

[Captain Cold Nose]

If those same writers made as much of a deal about the steroid use in the NFL and Arnold Schwarzenegger's entire career being owed to past anabolic steroid use, I'd probably be inclined to take them a lot more seriously.

Indeed. And that expands beyond writers.

[timmyj51]

'Ol Sammy's just punched his ticket to the trashcan of baseball history.
Let's see now, four roidheads down, 100 to go. By the time all the
"accomplishments", "achievements", "milestones" of these juiced up
lab monkeys are expunged the baseball record book's gonna be a lot
lighter and future HOF nominee lists a lot, lot, shorter.

[timmyj51]

If those same writers made as much of a deal about the steroid use in the NFL and Arnold Schwarzenegger's entire career being owed to past anabolic steroid use, I'd probably be inclined to take them a lot more seriously.





Not at all the same. Drugs, dope, and other assorted objectionable associations are part and parcel of "Ahnold", NFL, WWF, and other sports as much as
drugs are with rock bands. Baseball projects itself up as true blue America,
motherhood and apple pie, fathers playing catch with their sons,
etc. etc. If baseball wants to maintain this image it's gonna be held to a higher moral standard than other sports, as well it should be.

[SamtheBravesFan]

With all these 90's/00's sluggers being dragged out of hiding its making Griffey seem better and better. Oner of only 4 hitters to have a legit 600 HR tally.

We don't know that for certain.

[Captain Cold Nose]

'Ol Sammy's just punched his ticket to the trashcan of baseball history.
Let's see now, four roidheads down, 100 to go. By the time all the
"accomplishments", "achievements", "milestones" of these juiced up
lab monkeys are expunged the baseball record book's gonna be a lot
lighter and future HOF nominee lists a lot, lot, shorter.

Ah, the convenience of uneducated myopia.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

i dont disagree with you. I'm saying that I personally dont see it as one is any worse than the other.

OK ROCK, I can buy that.

[Seattle1]

Slammy, the resident Houdini of the juicer crew has finally had the first bit of real evidence against him established.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/17/sports/baseball/17doping.html?_r=1&ref=sports


Whoooaaaahhh I'm sooooooo suuurrrprissssed.

:rolleyes:

:laugh

:rofl:

[Ace Venom]

Not at all the same. Drugs, dope, and other assorted objectionable associations are part and parcel of "Ahnold", NFL, WWF, and other sports as much as
drugs are with rock bands. Baseball projects itself up as true blue America,
motherhood and apple pie, fathers playing catch with their sons,
etc. etc. If baseball wants to maintain this image it's gonna be held to a higher moral standard than other sports, as well it should be.

Higher moral standard? I don't see what's so moral about guys playing a baseball game. Given that professional football is much more popular than professional baseball in this country, you could argue that baseball's lofty status as America's pastime is shot because the NFL is king. There's no reason for baseball to be held to a higher standard than the NFL, bodybuilding, the NBA or even the NHL.

Given that football is America's favorite sport, it reflects American values quite well. If you get in trouble, the question is when you can come back and not whether or not you should be banned. I honestly don't want doping in any sport, whether it be professional bodybuilding or professional baseball. The long term health consequences don't always justify short term gains. Schwarzenegger hasn't been immune to health issues from his steroid use and neither has Canseco.

We've been willing to forgive Fergie Jenkins and Paul Molitor for illegal drug use. We've forgiven Mantle for being an alcoholic and an adulterer. We've been willing to give Terry Bradshaw and Arnold Schwarzenegger free passes. Obviously drug use is a problem in every facet of life, including the sports we enjoy to watch. It doesn't excuse drug use, but I think the moral indignation is misplaced and ultimately unwarranted. It doesn't solve anything because people are still going to try to beat the system for short term gains while ignoring any long term health effects. Does it make it right? No. I'm more concerned about the health issues than I am about a few stupid records.

[gman5431]

The continuing story of the death of the word anonymous.

Yeah and at this point, obviously someone, somewhere has the entire list. Are they just going to drop one name every 3 months? This is almost comecial and i barely care anymore. Especially for Sosa because any sane person wrote him off as a roider years ago.

G Man

[Ace Venom]

Are they just going to drop one name every 3 months?

Only if the story is convenient. The players really need to stand up to this right now because these tests were supposed to be anonymous. I imagine if Griffey is on that list, his name wouldn't come out until he announced his retirement.

[Captain Cold Nose]

Only if the story is convenient. The players really need to stand up to this right now because these tests were supposed to be anonymous. I imagine if Griffey is on that list, his name wouldn't come out until he announced his retirement.

Unless someone is writing a book . . .

[Windy City Fan]

Only if the story is convenient. The players really need to stand up to this right now because these tests were supposed to be anonymous. I imagine if Griffey is on that list, his name wouldn't come out until he announced his retirement.

Excuse me if I won't shed a tear for Sosa. Yes, they were supposed to anonymous, but oh well. Baseball and the player's union wanted to protect the hundreds of players and superstars that they knew were juicing. Frankly, I'm glad the news is slowly being leaked out. The public and the HOF voters should be informed. And if this news prevents a fraud like Sosa from being elected to the HOF then I'm all for it.

[DaleC76]

They should probably go ahead and release the whole list now and get it behind them. I think that would be preferable to a name coming out every other month and dominating the news all over again.

[Captain Cold Nose]

Excuse me if I won't shed a tear for Sosa. Yes, they were supposed to anonymous, but oh well. Baseball and the player's union wanted to protect the hundreds of players and superstars that they knew were juicing. Frankly, I'm glad the news is slowly being leaked out. The public and the HOF voters should be informed. And if this news prevents a fraud like Sosa from being elected to the HOF then I'm all for it.

I find it very hard to believe a HOF voter, a 10+ year veteran of the press corps, didn't know anything until the revelation comes out. If you honestly think this is how the HOF voters gets informed then I don't know what to tell you.

I find it hard to put together a list of who isn't a fraud in this. Or a hypocrite. It's all so convenient, really.

[Ace Venom]

Excuse me if I won't shed a tear for Sosa. Yes, they were supposed to anonymous, but oh well. Baseball and the player's union wanted to protect the hundreds of players and superstars that they knew were juicing. Frankly, I'm glad the news is slowly being leaked out. The public and the HOF voters should be informed. And if this news prevents a fraud like Sosa from being elected to the HOF then I'm all for it.

No one asked you to shed a tear for Sosa. The fact of the matter is that major league baseball is getting off the hook because of this and the whole organization should not get a free pass for being complicit in the steroid era. Spare the the whole argument that Bud Selig was blocked from drug testing by the union. The strike was the reason that Selig wasn't going to provoke the union again, but he could have gone to Congress much earlier than he did.

The big issue is that the steroid era was making the owners a lot of money and because the owners put him there to make money, Selig couldn't exactly rock the boat until much later when it could possibly damage owner income. Gone are the days of Judge Landis ruling over baseball with an iron fist and good riddance to that. Even with all this, Selig still managed to force the toughest testing program in American professional sports down the throat of the union. The union still dropped the ball, but is continuing to function as if nothing happened.

It's still Sosa's fault. I never said what he did was right. I'm simply saying the moral outrage is a but unwarranted. People are undoubtedly going to be writing about the steroid era for years to come. Don't be surprised if Bud Selig goes into the Hall of Fame. Do not be surprised if managers, owners and teammates who benefited from the fruits of illegal drug usage go into the Hall of Fame. If you want the Hall of Fame clear of the steroid era, then you really should not induct anyone who had the majority of their service time from 1985-2003. You'd be incredibly naive to believe that this list and the Mitchell Report are the be all end all to the ones who used and the ones who knew about it and didn't say anything. Do you honestly think there are no game fixers in the Hall of Fame? I guarantee you that Landis didn't get them all.

[sturg1dj]

Not at all the same. Drugs, dope, and other assorted objectionable associations are part and parcel of "Ahnold", NFL, WWF, and other sports as much as
drugs are with rock bands. Baseball projects itself up as true blue America,
motherhood and apple pie, fathers playing catch with their sons,
etc. etc. If baseball wants to maintain this image it's gonna be held to a higher moral standard than other sports, as well it should be.

the only difference is personal perception. They are all cases of people using illegal substances for personal gain (and to think Arnold stopped when it became illegal is laughable.)

People who don't understand why Barry could be so popular in SF and Manny is still so loved in LA...that could be your reason. They elected a pot smoking steroid user as governor...maybe they just realize that none of this stuff is really all that huge of a deal.

Once again let me re-iterate my position...if there is a rule and you break it you should get punished a certain amount of games...if found out after the fact then nothing should happen. Of course the HOF is not run by MLB so they can do whatever they want.


So who has to get caught for us to realize that this isn't shocking and shouldn't change how we look at the game? At what point to we realize that stats never were equal and could never really be truly counted against each other, or that a HR in 1921 was not the same as a HR in 1961 which was not the same as a HR in 1991 which was not the same as a HR in 2001?

As long as MLB is making billions and paying its players based on performance, and as long as the difference between a minor league contract is significantly different than a major league one, and the difference between the minimum salary and a star salary is so different we will continue to see some sort of PED use. It doesn't matter if there is zero tolerance or no rules at all, people will try to beat the system. They always have, they always will. The league just needs to keep testing and keep suspending players.

[Windy City Fan]

I find it very hard to believe a HOF voter, a 10+ year veteran of the press corps, didn't know anything until the revelation comes out. If you honestly think this is how the HOF voters gets informed then I don't know what to tell you.

I find it hard to put together a list of who isn't a fraud in this. Or a hypocrite. It's all so convenient, really.

The Chicago Tribune just published an article last week (or maybe two weeks ago) about Sosa's HOF chances. They polled all of their writers who are HOF voters. One guy said no. One guy said unsure. The rest (about 8 voters I think) said yes, using the flimsy argument that there was no hard evidence Sosa had used.

These are guys who saw Sammy everyday, talked to his teammates both on and off the record. If any writers would know if Sosa was dirty, it would be these guys, but they claimed ignorance.

No one asked you to shed a tear for Sosa. The fact of the matter is that major league baseball is getting off the hook because of this and the whole organization should not get a free pass for being complicit in the steroid era. Spare the the whole argument that Bud Selig was blocked from drug testing by the union. The strike was the reason that Selig wasn't going to provoke the union again, but he could have gone to Congress much earlier than he did.

The big issue is that the steroid era was making the owners a lot of money and because the owners put him there to make money, Selig couldn't exactly rock the boat until much later when it could possibly damage owner income. Gone are the days of Judge Landis ruling over baseball with an iron fist and good riddance to that. Even with all this, Selig still managed to force the toughest testing program in American professional sports down the throat of the union. The union still dropped the ball, but is continuing to function as if nothing happened.

It's still Sosa's fault. I never said what he did was right. I'm simply saying the moral outrage is a but unwarranted. People are undoubtedly going to be writing about the steroid era for years to come. Don't be surprised if Bud Selig goes into the Hall of Fame. Do not be surprised if managers, owners and teammates who benefited from the fruits of illegal drug usage go into the Hall of Fame. If you want the Hall of Fame clear of the steroid era, then you really should not induct anyone who had the majority of their service time from 1985-2003. You'd be incredibly naive to believe that this list and the Mitchell Report are the be all end all to the ones who used and the ones who knew about it and didn't say anything. Do you honestly think there are no game fixers in the Hall of Fame? I guarantee you that Landis didn't get them all.

I agree the owners and the union were in on it. They knew about steriod use and turned a blind eye and probably even gave some unspoken approval for it. After all, everyone involved was making money off of it. That said, the players bear responsibility for their individual decisions. Its not like the owners stuck a syringe full of roids into a player as they signed a contract.

As to how to handle the steriod era, its a hard question. I have no problem keeping those who tested positive out. I know that means that some juicers will probably get in. Just like you said, there are almost certainly players who fixed games in the Hall, but that doesn't mean we have to honor the ones we know were guilty. According to that logic, no one should be in jail because other people have certainly gotten away with crimes. Just because we might not catch everyone is no reason to ignore those that have been caught red handed. That said, I don't advocate a witch hunt.

And on my more lenient days, I can even see electing guys like Bonds and Clemens who even though they are certainly guilty of juicing, had HOF talent before they ever touched steriods. I go back and forth on if I would support them, but if they are elected I won't kickup a fuss. But a guy like Sosa who wouldn't even sniff the HOF without chemical enhancement, the thought of him being in the HOF makes me want to puke.

[Ace Venom]

As to how to handle the steriod era, its a hard question. I have no problem keeping those who tested positive out. I know that means that some juicers will probably get in. Just like you said, there are almost certainly players who fixed games in the Hall, but that doesn't mean we have to honor the ones we know were guilty. According to that logic, no one should be in jail because other people have certainly gotten away with crimes. Just because we might not catch everyone is no reason to ignore those that have been caught red handed. That said, I don't advocate a witch hunt.

I'm not exactly saying no penalty and complete amnesty for all is what is needed. I obviously think amnesty for the players who got caught or were suspected before MLB actually starting enforcing its drug policy is fine. I'm not a huge fan of retroactively punishing people because the union wouldn't let MLB police its own sport especially when you're considering some of these cases are years old and before 2004.

I honestly have no sympathy for players who got busted when MLB was actually enforcing the rules (see Palmeiro and Ramirez), so I can say with all certainty that they should never sniff the Hall of Fame just as a tax on being stupid enough to keep doing what they were doing after the free ride was gone. Sure MLB did consider steroids illegal before they actually put penalties in place to deal with the situation in house, but it was one of those things treated like speeding or jay walking and considered victimless as long as the dollars kept flowing into their coffers. It's part of why I think guys like Sosa and McGwire should go into the Hall of Fame and Palmeiro and Ramirez should not.

[sturg1dj]

I'm not exactly saying no penalty and complete amnesty for all is what is needed. I obviously think amnesty for the players who got caught or were suspected before MLB actually starting enforcing its drug policy is fine. I'm not a huge fan of retroactively punishing people because the union wouldn't let MLB police its own sport especially when you're considering some of these cases are years old and before 2004.

I honestly have no sympathy for players who got busted when MLB was actually enforcing the rules (see Palmeiro and Ramirez), so I can say with all certainty that they should never sniff the Hall of Fame just as a tax on being stupid enough to keep doing what they were doing after the free ride was gone. Sure MLB did consider steroids illegal before they actually put penalties in place to deal with the situation in house, but it was one of those things treated like speeding or jay walking and considered victimless as long as the dollars kept flowing into their coffers. It's part of why I think guys like Sosa and McGwire should go into the Hall of Fame and Palmeiro and Ramirez should not.


I don't feel HOF should be affected...but I also understand how it can be. I think the retroactive punishments are BS, but when it comes to current players under the current system I don't think a steroid suspension should affect HOF chances. If a player (and by this I mean a player who only played during the testing days) used PEDs during his entire career then he would be suspended too often to put up the stats needed for the HOF. If the player is caught once, and doesn't get caught again then with the rules in place we need to assume he played clean the rest of the way.

Of course I am dreaming if I think this is how it would be.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

The Chicago Tribune just published an article last week (or maybe two weeks ago) about Sosa's HOF chances. They polled all of their writers who are HOF voters. One guy said no. One guy said unsure. The rest (about 8 voters I think) said yes, using the flimsy argument that there was no hard evidence Sosa had used.

These are guys who saw Sammy everyday, talked to his teammates both on and off the record. If any writers would know if Sosa was dirty, it would be these guys, but they claimed ignorance.



I agree the owners and the union were in on it. They knew about steriod use and turned a blind eye and probably even gave some unspoken approval for it. After all, everyone involved was making money off of it. That said, the players bear responsibility for their individual decisions. Its not like the owners stuck a syringe full of roids into a player as they signed a contract.

As to how to handle the steriod era, its a hard question. I have no problem keeping those who tested positive out. I know that means that some juicers will probably get in. Just like you said, there are almost certainly players who fixed games in the Hall, but that doesn't mean we have to honor the ones we know were guilty. According to that logic, no one should be in jail because other people have certainly gotten away with crimes. Just because we might not catch everyone is no reason to ignore those that have been caught red handed. That said, I don't advocate a witch hunt.

And on my more lenient days, I can even see electing guys like Bonds and Clemens who even though they are certainly guilty of juicing, had HOF talent before they ever touched steriods. I go back and forth on if I would support them, but if they are elected I won't kickup a fuss. But a guy like Sosa who wouldn't even sniff the HOF without chemical enhancement, the thought of him being in the HOF makes me want to puke.

That says it all for me. Some have to get off this kick of laying the blame on others. Should MLB have started testing and handing out penalties long ago, yes they should have, maybe the whole deal wouldn't have blown up in their face.

OK now thats out of the way, the bottom line is the player who used shoulders all the blame, he made a choice.
Now it's turning out for some that the user is some kind of victim, blame MLB and some a while back even blaming the fans........we crave the long ball and they they try to please us.....now we want to hang them, that line is joke.

They went to the stuff to enhance performance, plain and simple, doesn't matter if some believe they had to in order to keep pace with other users, another joke.
Lets get right to the point, they chose to go down that road, stop passing the buck.

Also in agreement it appears that some users were already headed to the HOF, Sammy is not one of them, he had two careers, decent hitter with some power then he turns into Superman.

[BoweryBoys]

Higher moral standard? I don't see what's so moral about guys playing a baseball game. Given that professional football is much more popular than professional baseball in this country, you could argue that baseball's lofty status as America's pastime is shot because the NFL is king. There's no reason for baseball to be held to a higher standard than the NFL, bodybuilding, the NBA or even the NHL.

Given that football is America's favorite sport, it reflects American values quite well. If you get in trouble, the question is when you can come back and not whether or not you should be banned. I honestly don't want doping in any sport, whether it be professional bodybuilding or professional baseball. The long term health consequences don't always justify short term gains. Schwarzenegger hasn't been immune to health issues from his steroid use and neither has Canseco.

We've been willing to forgive Fergie Jenkins and Paul Molitor for illegal drug use. We've forgiven Mantle for being an alcoholic and an adulterer. We've been willing to give Terry Bradshaw and Arnold Schwarzenegger free passes. Obviously drug use is a problem in every facet of life, including the sports we enjoy to watch. It doesn't excuse drug use, but I think the moral indignation is misplaced and ultimately unwarranted. It doesn't solve anything because people are still going to try to beat the system for short term gains while ignoring any long term health effects. Does it make it right? No. I'm more concerned about the health issues than I am about a few stupid records.

One thing I really don't understand regarding this issue is the use of such terms as "moral indignation". This is about nothing more then a certain percentage of baseball fans and some members in the media who dislike the idea that certain players decided they would use illegal drugs in an attempt to boost their performance. Seems to me that they are entitled to their opinion and to express that opinion without it being classified as "moral indignation". It is not as if there is some conspiracy between some members of the media and some fans to cause an end to MLB as we know it. Also, nowhere do I ever see any proof that some fans and members of the media do not allow, or believe, that players are human beings with human foibles. Some fans just don't like that some players have used steroids.

Speaking only for myself, I couldn't care less what happens in the NFL and other sports. I love MLB and this site is Baseball Fever and I happen to have no respect for any baseball player who decided to use steroids in hopes of hitting more HRs, etc. I also don't think what happens in other sports is a valid excuse for MLB players who used steroids. If that makes some want to classify someone like me as "morally indignant" then so be it but this has nothing to do with morals and everything to do with some fans hating that some players used steroids in the game they love.

[BoweryBoys]

Excuse me if I won't shed a tear for Sosa. Yes, they were supposed to anonymous, but oh well. Baseball and the player's union wanted to protect the hundreds of players and superstars that they knew were juicing. Frankly, I'm glad the news is slowly being leaked out. The public and the HOF voters should be informed. And if this news prevents a fraud like Sosa from being elected to the HOF then I'm all for it.

Better watch out or you will be called something like "morally indignant" because you love baseball and hate the fact that some players chose to use chemicals in an attempt to make themselves appear to be greater players then they may otherwise have been without the chemicals. Notice I use the terms "players" and "chose" because if certain players hadn't decided to make that choice in the first place then we wouldn't be even having discussions like this. Guess it is always easier for some to blame the media and some fans instead.

[BoweryBoys]

No one asked you to shed a tear for Sosa. The fact of the matter is that major league baseball is getting off the hook because of this and the whole organization should not get a free pass for being complicit in the steroid era. Spare the the whole argument that Bud Selig was blocked from drug testing by the union. The strike was the reason that Selig wasn't going to provoke the union again, but he could have gone to Congress much earlier than he did.

The big issue is that the steroid era was making the owners a lot of money and because the owners put him there to make money, Selig couldn't exactly rock the boat until much later when it could possibly damage owner income. Gone are the days of Judge Landis ruling over baseball with an iron fist and good riddance to that. Even with all this, Selig still managed to force the toughest testing program in American professional sports down the throat of the union. The union still dropped the ball, but is continuing to function as if nothing happened.

It's still Sosa's fault. I never said what he did was right. I'm simply saying the moral outrage is a but unwarranted. People are undoubtedly going to be writing about the steroid era for years to come. Don't be surprised if Bud Selig goes into the Hall of Fame. Do not be surprised if managers, owners and teammates who benefited from the fruits of illegal drug usage go into the Hall of Fame. If you want the Hall of Fame clear of the steroid era, then you really should not induct anyone who had the majority of their service time from 1985-2003. You'd be incredibly naive to believe that this list and the Mitchell Report are the be all end all to the ones who used and the ones who knew about it and didn't say anything. Do you honestly think there are no game fixers in the Hall of Fame? I guarantee you that Landis didn't get them all.

Again, you make great points and I have great respect for what you write but I think the idea of "moral outrage" is over done in this type issue. The bottom-line is that it is still the players who chose to use and they didn't have to make that choice- unless someone can offer up definite proof that the owners and Selig forced players to use steroids.

It makes zero difference what happens in other sports, what Landis would have or could have done in the past, game fixers, wife beaters, spit ballers, etc. The issue is about some MLB fans hate that some MLB players used steroids. It seems that fact bothers some other fans and they are the ones who bring "moral outrage" into the equation by unfairly painting those opposed to steroids in baseball with that broad inaccurate brush. I see no one on any moral crusades. I do see some fans and some baseball writers who do not think that some players that used steroids should be considered as great as some would like to think they were, even to the point of deciding said players will not gain HOF induction because without chemicals the numbers would not be as great.

Don't get me wrong, I am not judging if steroids even help a player be better. Just stating why some fans and writers feel as they do. The point is the issue is more about to what degree a player may be a "fraud", or as to how much of their numbers could be helped by steroids. That is what makes some people okey with a player who used not gaining HOF induction. Not some holy joe moral outrage.

[BoweryBoys]

One last thing and then people can hate all over my opinions if they choose.

Baseball is, and always has been, a game about numbers and level of accomplishment. The people who hate steroids in baseball, rightfully or wrongfully, hate the steroid use because they feel that some players used steroids to pad their, numbers, level of accomplishment, legacy, etc. Also, that certain players then may gain more respect and admiration then they may otherwise deserve. Also, the fact that it can then elevate the player's standing in the game's history and at the same time maybe lower some other player's standing.

For example, how many 60 or 70 HR seasons were there between just 1998 and 2001? How many were there prior to 1998? If those guys hit all those HRs on just talent alone then they deserve to be thought of as perhaps the greatest HR hitters of all-time better then the past guys who could only manage two 60+ HR seasons. Thing is that many don't believe it was done on talent alone. I see no moral outrage in that.

[BoweryBoys]

the only difference is personal perception. They are all cases of people using illegal substances for personal gain (and to think Arnold stopped when it became illegal is laughable.)

People who don't understand why Barry could be so popular in SF and Manny is still so loved in LA...that could be your reason. They elected a pot smoking steroid user as governor...maybe they just realize that none of this stuff is really all that huge of a deal.

Once again let me re-iterate my position...if there is a rule and you break it you should get punished a certain amount of games...if found out after the fact then nothing should happen. Of course the HOF is not run by MLB so they can do whatever they want.


So who has to get caught for us to realize that this isn't shocking and shouldn't change how we look at the game? At what point to we realize that stats never were equal and could never really be truly counted against each other, or that a HR in 1921 was not the same as a HR in 1961 which was not the same as a HR in 1991 which was not the same as a HR in 2001?

As long as MLB is making billions and paying its players based on performance, and as long as the difference between a minor league contract is significantly different than a major league one, and the difference between the minimum salary and a star salary is so different we will continue to see some sort of PED use. It doesn't matter if there is zero tolerance or no rules at all, people will try to beat the system. They always have, they always will. The league just needs to keep testing and keep suspending players.

You're correct in what you write and that still doesn't mean that people who just don't like steroids in baseball should stop hating steroids in baseball. You can be realistic and know that to some extent some players will try to use chemicals to be better but that doesn't you give up the right to hate that fact and aspect of the game, as well as those players.

And as for Bonds in SF and Manny in LA, it is just simple human nature that people are more willing to forgive and accept when it is "one of their guys" on "their team". Sure there are lots of hypocritical people in this issue. That is partly why people who hate steroids in baseball hate it, because it helps skewer who is truly deserving of being considered great and who isn't and so much of it is colored by some people's unwillingness to even consider someone they grew up admiring as great maybe really wasn't so great.

[BoweryBoys]

"But a guy like Sosa who wouldn't even sniff the HOF without chemical enhancement, the thought of him being in the HOF makes me want to puke."

Bingo, that sums up the idea behind why some fans and baseball writers hate that some players used steroids. There is no "moral outrage" or "moral indignation" in the equation. It is about the possibility that perhaps some players may achieve status they otherwise may not deserve. It is not about morals. It is about that some fans dearly respect the game and its history.

IMHO a more valid issue and debate would be in proving or disproving whether steroids actually have anything to do with making a player better then he would have been otherwise.

[BoweryBoys]

That says it all for me. Some have to get off this kick of laying the blame on others. Should MLB have started testing and handing out penalties long ago, yes they should have, maybe the whole deal wouldn't have blown up in their face.

OK now thats out of the way, the bottom line is the player who used shoulders all the blame, he made a choice.
Now it's turning out for some that the user is some kind of victim, blame MLB and some a while back even blaming the fans........we crave the long ball and they they try to please us.....now we want to hang them, that line is joke.

They went to the stuff to enhance performance, plain and simple, doesn't matter if some believe they had to in order to keep pace with other users, another joke.
Lets get right to the point, they chose to go down that road, stop passing the buck.

Also in agreement it appears that some users were already headed to the HOF, Sammy is not one of them, he had two careers, decent hitter with some power then he turns into Superman.

Thank you Windy City and Shoeless Joe for writing some of the most honest and most common sense posts on this issue. It is refreshing among the hyperbole and buck passing and excuse making that is all too often posted on this issue.

[rockin500]

i would like to know exactly what he tested positive for.

[sturg1dj]

One last thing and then people can hate all over my opinions if they choose.

Baseball is, and always has been, a game about numbers and level of accomplishment. The people who hate steroids in baseball, rightfully or wrongfully, hate the steroid use because they feel that some players used steroids to pad their, numbers, level of accomplishment, legacy, etc. Also, that certain players then may gain more respect and admiration then they may otherwise deserve. Also, the fact that it can then elevate the player's standing in the game's history and at the same time maybe lower some other player's standing.

For example, how many 60 or 70 HR seasons were there between just 1998 and 2001? How many were there prior to 1998? If those guys hit all those HRs on just talent alone then they deserve to be thought of as perhaps the greatest HR hitters of all-time better then the past guys who could only manage two 60+ HR seasons. Thing is that many don't believe it was done on talent alone. I see no moral outrage in that.

That says it all for me. Some have to get off this kick of laying the blame on others. Should MLB have started testing and handing out penalties long ago, yes they should have, maybe the whole deal wouldn't have blown up in their face.

OK now thats out of the way, the bottom line is the player who used shoulders all the blame, he made a choice.
Now it's turning out for some that the user is some kind of victim, blame MLB and some a while back even blaming the fans........we crave the long ball and they they try to please us.....now we want to hang them, that line is joke.

They went to the stuff to enhance performance, plain and simple, doesn't matter if some believe they had to in order to keep pace with other users, another joke.
Lets get right to the point, they chose to go down that road, stop passing the buck.

Also in agreement it appears that some users were already headed to the HOF, Sammy is not one of them, he had two careers, decent hitter with some power then he turns into Superman.



the easiest thing in the world is to blame the individual and what happens when you do that and only punish the individual is that you get rid of that individual; you don't go after the larger problem. during the times where the owners and union were ignoring it yes Sosa made the decision to use...well, if you kicked him out then his replacement would use....unless you go after the source of the problem.

I always hear how this is not a good message for the kids and its not good for the game, yet if the only response is to punish the individual then you don't have as much reason to stop the behavior as you could. Sure the kids may see there is some risk for using as far as career risk...but the risk/reward is still too great especially for the borderline player (in that a borderline player would be silly not to risk the suspensions or even bannings for that one paycheck he may never get otherwise). If the teams were penalized for having someone on their team who fails a drug test then all of the sudden you have a two tier risk for the player. Using will not only make him look bad to the fans, but now his future job prospects will be hurt as well.

as for Sosa and how he made the choice and he has to live with it, lets take a look at that choice shall we? Yes, he is shamed and he will probably not be in the HOF...but you know what he made over $120 million dollars and if you think about it his choice was do whatever he could to make the bigs work in the fields for nothing or join the military (his words). I think he will live with it just fine.

this talk may get old for many of you, but what gets old for me is when a player gets caught (or not caught in many cases) all of the blame goes to him while many involved just smile and know it will never get to them.


Chicks dig the longball + no testing = ??

just like

162 game schedule + fewer days off + no testing = ??



at some point the really shocked fans are going to have to accept (not like, just accept) that PED use and suspensions are going to be part of the game or stop watching. They don't have to cheer for the players but they need to stop acting like the league is going to fall apart because of it. What bothers me is that it will probably not happen until the last player who played prior to testing has retired.

[sturg1dj]

I just read that Congress is going to look into Sosa. Now I don't care where you stand, and I am not even going to say he shouldn't get into trouble for lying...whatever.

but with the mess this country is in right now due to the economy, this would not be something I would want my tax dollars paying for at the moment. Maybe in the future, but now, there has to be much more important things to do.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

the easiest thing in the world is to blame the individual and what happens when you do that and only punish the individual is that you get rid of that individual; you don't go after the larger problem. during the times where the owners and union were ignoring it yes Sosa made the decision to use...well, if you kicked him out then his replacement would use....unless you go after the source of the problem.

I always hear how this is not a good message for the kids and its not good for the game, yet if the only response is to punish the individual then you don't have as much reason to stop the behavior as you could. Sure the kids may see there is some risk for using as far as career risk...but the risk/reward is still too great especially for the borderline player (in that a borderline player would be silly not to risk the suspensions or even bannings for that one paycheck he may never get otherwise). If the teams were penalized for having someone on their team who fails a drug test then all of the sudden you have a two tier risk for the player. Using will not only make him look bad to the fans, but now his future job prospects will be hurt as well.

as for Sosa and how he made the choice and he has to live with it, lets take a look at that choice shall we? Yes, he is shamed and he will probably not be in the HOF...but you know what he made over $120 million dollars and if you think about it his choice was do whatever he could to make the bigs work in the fields for nothing or join the military (his words). I think he will live with it just fine. this talk may get old for many of you, but what gets old for me is when a player gets caught (or not caught in many cases) all of the blame goes to him while many involved just smile and know it will never get to them.



Never looked at it that way. Great news for any youngsters out there, listen up. Sammy may have broken a rule, shamed himself and lowered his chance at the HOF. But...............look at all the money he made, he's a winner.

[Los Bravos]

If those same writers made as much of a deal about the steroid use in the NFL and Arnold Schwarzenegger's entire career being owed to past anabolic steroid use, I'd probably be inclined to take them a lot more seriously.That's largely dead on. The NFL gets far, far too easy a pass, mainly because it's fans really couldn't care less, as long as they get their weekly dose of colorful mayhem. They elected a pot smoking steroid user as governor...Don't forget "serial groper" and "repeated fabulist." :ughh
as for Sosa and how he made the choice and he has to live with it, lets take a look at that choice shall we? Yes, he is shamed and he will probably not be in the HOF...but you know what he made over $120 million dollars and if you think about it his choice was do whatever he could to make the bigs work in the fields for nothing or join the military (his words). I think he will live with it just fine.Probably, but he seemed convinced he was Hall bound when he announced his retirement (and it's likely that someone who knew of his positive test leaked the info as a slap at him, which is pretty despicable in and of itself.)

Having said that, although your point about his choices is pretty trenchant, he could have made a solid, even spectacular, living in the game with the skill set he brought to the majors in '89.

[04golf]

Baseball is entertainment, the players are actors in a grand show. You pay to be entertained and the players give you what you paid for. I dont care to know what goes on behind the scenes to make the show run, I just care about what I see on stage. In the end you need to realize its just baseball, its just a game and this shouldnt be the focus in media or life. I never feel bad for a player whether it be from PED use or losing a big game. In the end they go home to their millions and are making a nice salary in the career of choice. We as fans want to be entertained and there is no denying baseball has been entertaining. We put baseball on a different level because of history and records. Other sports dont fixate on personal stats and records.

Congress should be worrying about the countrys problem and not baseball. Let MLB deal with baseball. It just shows how our priorities are in the wrong place. Entertainment is #1 in america. Also its just a waste of time to go after past players, they dont make a current difference in the sport right now.

Why its important to stop PED use is so kids right now dont do the same and run into serious health issues. Also its an imoral decision and it can lead to more bad decisions. They question if my favorite ballplayer does steriods why shouldnt I? I would have no clue how to talk to a kid about steroids if asked..what do you tell them?

As an adult, baseball is a game, its entertainment, you cant take it too seriously. When the curtain falls onto the stage thats where the game ends.

[Windy City Fan]

this talk may get old for many of you, but what gets old for me is when a player gets caught (or not caught in many cases) all of the blame goes to him while many involved just smile and know it will never get to them.

Who else should we blame for that player's decision? Yes, I agree the owners knew about it, profited from it and probably silently condoned it. They helped create an enviroment where steriods were an attractive option, but they did not inject one player with steriods. Each player that used made a decision and guess who gets to live with the consequences of that decision? The player that made it.

Yes, baseball needed to change the way it looked at steriods as an institution to address the problem, but that doesn't in any way absolve any player for the individual choices they made. They get to live with the millions of dollars they made while juicing, and they also get to live with the shame and public scorn they earned with their juicing.

This whole blame baseball, blame the fans, blame anyone but the players is utter crap. Whatever happened to the concept of personal responsibility? This is like when some thug shoots a clerk dead so he can rob the place of twelve bucks and then cries to the judge he's a product of the slums of the inner city, a broken home, and an abusive parent. Boo hoo. Cry me a river. He made a choice, he gets to live with the consequences of it.

at some point the really shocked fans are going to have to accept (not like, just accept) that PED use and suspensions are going to be part of the game or stop watching. They don't have to cheer for the players but they need to stop acting like the league is going to fall apart because of it. What bothers me is that it will probably not happen until the last player who played prior to testing has retired.

I accept that its part of the game, but I feel no obligation to honor PED users. And with Sosa it goes beyond just PED use (which is bad enough in my eyes). Sosa has always gone out of his way to portray himself as a clean player. Here's a quote from when he announced his retirement: "Everything I achieved, I did it thanks to my perseverance." Now we know what many of us have been saying about Sosa for ages. Everything he achieved, he did thanks to a syringe. The man is not only a cheater, he's a fraud and a liar. The thought of honoring his career makes me sick to my stomach.

[Los Bravos]

Unless I'm very mistaken, weren't all of the positive testers told that their samples came back with a plus? (facetious :D)

If so, he made that statement, and at least a couple under oath, that he must have known were completely untrue. That's not going to go over well.

[fenrir]

Unlike manny or arod, this particular player using roids is absolutely no surprise. I wonder if there is anymore so-called "superstar players" who tested positive. I wouldn't be shocked if someone like Jeff Bagwell or perhaps Pudge Rodriguez end up being exposed next.

[rockin500]

Who else should we blame for that player's decision? Yes, I agree the owners knew about it, profited from it and probably silently condoned it. They helped create an enviroment where steriods were an attractive option, but they did not inject one player with steriods. Each player that used made a decision and guess who gets to live with the consequences of that decision? The player that made it.

Yes, baseball needed to change the way it looked at steriods as an institution to address the problem, but that doesn't in any way absolve any player for the individual choices they made. They get to live with the millions of dollars they made while juicing, and they also get to live with the shame and public scorn they earned with their juicing.

This whole blame baseball, blame the fans, blame anyone but the players is utter crap. Whatever happened to the concept of personal responsibility? This is like when some thug shoots a clerk dead so he can rob the place of twelve bucks and then cries to the judge he's a product of the slums of the inner city, a broken home, and an abusive parent. Boo hoo. Cry me a river. He made a choice, he gets to live with the consequences of it.



I accept that its part of the game, but I feel no obligation to honor PED users. And with Sosa it goes beyond just PED use (which is bad enough in my eyes). Sosa has always gone out of his way to portray himself as a clean player. Here's a quote from when he announced his retirement: "Everything I achieved, I did it thanks to my perseverance." Now we know what many of us have been saying about Sosa for ages. Everything he achieved, he did thanks to a syringe. The man is not only a cheater, he's a fraud and a liar. The thought of honoring his career makes me sick to my stomach.
who enabled the players to do it? enablers are every bit a part of the problem as the actual user is. If you dont think that, you dont understand drug use (or whatever kind of abuse). Sure sometimes there arent people enabling a person to do such, but not when its a system wide problem. and it was.

If the players union hadnt looked the other way, if baseball owners didnt care about the check books, if the fans actually CARED how the players did it when a preponderance of evidence suggested that players were using, then it would have been a lot harder for said player to use. Not impossible, mind you, just harder.

[BoweryBoys]

the easiest thing in the world is to blame the individual and what happens when you do that and only punish the individual is that you get rid of that individual; you don't go after the larger problem. during the times where the owners and union were ignoring it yes Sosa made the decision to use...well, if you kicked him out then his replacement would use....unless you go after the source of the problem.

I always hear how this is not a good message for the kids and its not good for the game, yet if the only response is to punish the individual then you don't have as much reason to stop the behavior as you could. Sure the kids may see there is some risk for using as far as career risk...but the risk/reward is still too great especially for the borderline player (in that a borderline player would be silly not to risk the suspensions or even bannings for that one paycheck he may never get otherwise). If the teams were penalized for having someone on their team who fails a drug test then all of the sudden you have a two tier risk for the player. Using will not only make him look bad to the fans, but now his future job prospects will be hurt as well.

as for Sosa and how he made the choice and he has to live with it, lets take a look at that choice shall we? Yes, he is shamed and he will probably not be in the HOF...but you know what he made over $120 million dollars and if you think about it his choice was do whatever he could to make the bigs work in the fields for nothing or join the military (his words). I think he will live with it just fine.

this talk may get old for many of you, but what gets old for me is when a player gets caught (or not caught in many cases) all of the blame goes to him while many involved just smile and know it will never get to them.


Chicks dig the longball + no testing = ??

just like

162 game schedule + fewer days off + no testing = ??



at some point the really shocked fans are going to have to accept (not like, just accept) that PED use and suspensions are going to be part of the game or stop watching. They don't have to cheer for the players but they need to stop acting like the league is going to fall apart because of it. What bothers me is that it will probably not happen until the last player who played prior to testing has retired.

There is no real way of knowing that Sosa's replacement would also choose to use PEDs, this is just an assumption. Just because it was at a time when nothing was being done to stop them does not necessarily mean that any/all players would make the same choice that some others apparently did. To use that logic is to not recognize that adult human beings are responsible for their own choices regardless of what others do, may be doing.

I'd, at least as one fan, would have to respectfully disagree with your second paragraph though I see the point you're trying to make. I agree that it would help to also punish the team that seems to have done nothing to stop PED use, or even may have encouraged it, and that may seem fair. However, some fans seem to be against any punishment at all and seem to feel PEDs in MLB are no big deal. Any punishment has to start with the player who made the choice to use and if that punishment is harsh enough in a meaningful way I don't agree that it wouldn't deter other up and coming players from using when they see what is at risk.

Again, I don't see any "really shocked fans". Just fans who grew suspicious when they saw a lot of 60 plus HR seasons in a short period of time. I feel these are fans that love HRs and the game as much as other fans but when evidence of PED influence on MLB began to surface they just want that influence to be known, understood and recognized and not just dismissed or excused. The bottom-line is that there is nothing wrong with starting the punishment with a player who used because the simple fact they made that decision inthe first place.

[BoweryBoys]

Speaking as just one fan, what I don't like about the PED problem most is that some fans seem to want to blame everything and everyone else they can except for the player(s) who made the choice in the first place. Often there is defense for a player based on the no evidence idea and then when evidence does surface comes rationalizations and excuse making.

To me, as one fan, what is important is that whatever information can come out that sheds light on the fact that 1998-2001 may not have occurred on pure talent alone so fans can have a proper frame of reference in judging that era and those accomplishments. Along with information and evidence on certain players using PEDs should come information and evidence of if/how PEDs helped someone out perform even Babe Ruth.

I don't think it is fair to characterize fans who want to know about players steroid use in baseball as being morally outraged or shocked. I think most fans just want to know that if certain players are going to be considered as the greatest sluggers or HR hitters of all -time then said players truly deserve that distinction on talent alone. That is why players first and foremost must take the heat for their own choice to use. If they want the recognition as one of the greatest then they must also accept and understand the scrutiny of their accomplishment if evidence comes out that they used PEDs.

[rockin500]

Speaking as just one fan, what I don't like about the PED problem most is that some fans seem to want to blame everything and everyone else they can except for the player(s) who made the choice in the first place. Often there is defense for a player based on the no evidence idea and then when evidence does surface comes rationalizations and excuse making.

To me, as one fan, what is important is that whatever information can come out that sheds light on the fact that 1998-2001 may not have occurred on pure talent alone so fans can have a proper frame of reference in judging that era and those accomplishments. Along with information and evidence on certain players using PEDs should come information and evidence of if/how PEDs helped someone out perform even Babe Ruth.

I don't think it is fair to characterize fans who want to know about players steroid use in baseball as being morally outraged or shocked. I think most fans just want to know that if certain players are going to be considered as the greatest sluggers or HR hitters of all -time then said players truly deserve that distinction on talent alone. That is why players first and foremost must take the heat for their own choice to use. If they want the recognition as one of the greatest then they must also accept and understand the scrutiny of their accomplishment if evidence comes out that they used PEDs.
of course the player is at fault for taking said substances. but it very rarely happens in a vacuum. So yeah, I definitely blame the establishment and those reporting on it because they share the blame for ALLOWING it to happen.

[keystone]

Fans are so "shocked" that they are going to welcome Manny back with open arms -- at least in LA.

[sturg1dj]

There is no real way of knowing that Sosa's replacement would also choose to use PEDs, this is just an assumption. Just because it was at a time when nothing was being done to stop them does not necessarily mean that any/all players would make the same choice that some others apparently did. To use that logic is to not recognize that adult human beings are responsible for their own choices regardless of what others do, may be doing.

I'd, at least as one fan, would have to respectfully disagree with your second paragraph though I see the point you're trying to make. I agree that it would help to also punish the team that seems to have done nothing to stop PED use, or even may have encouraged it, and that may seem fair. However, some fans seem to be against any punishment at all and seem to feel PEDs in MLB are no big deal. Any punishment has to start with the player who made the choice to use and if that punishment is harsh enough in a meaningful way I don't agree that it wouldn't deter other up and coming players from using when they see what is at risk.

Again, I don't see any "really shocked fans". Just fans who grew suspicious when they saw a lot of 60 plus HR seasons in a short period of time. I feel these are fans that love HRs and the game as much as other fans but when evidence of PED influence on MLB began to surface they just want that influence to be known, understood and recognized and not just dismissed or excused. The bottom-line is that there is nothing wrong with starting the punishment with a player who used because the simple fact they made that decision inthe first place.

I am one of those people who in the grand scheme would have no problem if these things were legal, but I also think that if there is a rule that is enforced then as a player you have to follow it. That is why these pre-testing cases to me are such a gray area. Yes, they may have broken the law, but that is something for the police to take care of not the person's employer.

[sturg1dj]

Never looked at it that way. Great news for any youngsters out there, listen up. Sammy may have broken a rule, shamed himself and lowered his chance at the HOF. But...............look at all the money he made, he's a winner.

if you want to look at all things in black and white that is up to you. But if you think about it as a man born in another country he lived the American dream he was told about.


is there more to live that personal accolades and fame? He got out of the sweatshops (yes he said he worked in a sweatshop) and brought his family with him. Yes, I would say that he is a winner. He did not do it the way everyone wanted him to, but what is the alternative? And we cannot assume he wasn't using something even when he was thinner.

For the kids in the Dominican Republic I would say they should see him as a winner. I would hope they would seek other ways to get out, but with so few prospects (the army, farms, sweatshops or baseball) it will be difficult. For American kids (and their parents), yes it would be hard for them to understand this, since the vast majority do not know the poverty he went through.

I mean I was kind of poor growing up, but I always had a glove, and so did all of my friends...we didn't have to make our own. And before we were 16 the only job any of us had was paper boy. Can you imagine?

the PED story is not as cut and dry as many think. On one hand you have Barry Bonds who if he used (I still feel I need to put that) did it out of vanity because he was already one of if not the best player in the game and he game from an upper class family. This case is maddening and distorts the debate. People like him, Roger Clemens, A-Rod, and Manny are the unique cases of elite players doing what they can to either keep it going or to cement a place in history. Then you have the cases of the minor leaguer who doesn't have it who does it for the one payday that justifies the choice to play baseball. Or you have the Miguel Tejada case where he was going to be sent back to the DR.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

as for Sosa and how he made the choice and he has to live with it, lets take a look at that choice shall we? Yes, he is shamed and he will probably not be in the HOF...but you know what he made over $120 million dollars and if you think about it his choice was do whatever he could to make the bigs work in the fields for nothing or join the military (his words). I think he will live with it just fine.


Sturg, not sure what you mean by black and white in your post #74.

In an earlier post I commented on some of your words above, not a good example for a youngster to see the situation like you did, like I think you did.

In the above it appears that your saying Sammy may have done wrong, may not make the HOF but look he made all that money.
Did I misread your post, did I miss the point, maybe I did

[BoweryBoys]

of course the player is at fault for taking said substances. but it very rarely happens in a vacuum. So yeah, I definitely blame the establishment and those reporting on it because they share the blame for ALLOWING it to happen.

It makes little difference that it rarely happens in a vacuum. Life doesn't happen in a vacuum either and the bottom-line is that grown men of at least average intelligence and sanity are solely 100 percent responsible for the choices they make. No one forced a single player to ingest steroids just as no one forces a poor desperate person to commit a crime for money. Crime doesn't happen in a vacuum either and that still doesn't absolve people who can understand the difference between right and wrong from being responsible for their own actions. In the case of MLB players they have far less excuse and reason then a poor desperate person in need of money.

The sad thing is how deeply people feel about this issue. It seems split between those who don't like steroids in baseball, those who don't like that some don't like steroids in baseball, and those who just don't care. However, those who use the irrelevant arguments of what happens in other sports, what the government should be doing, others are also to blame, etc, miss the real points.

Baseball is a game where the frame of reference used to rate and judge greatness is a certain level of numerical statistical accomplishment. When something happens to certain numbers such as the number of 60 plus HR seasons between 1998 and 2001, and then evidence of steroid use begins to surface, fans are rightfully going to question those accomplishments and those players. Blaming others, making excuses, rationalizations, do nothing to take away that simple truth. What matters and the real point is fans being able to acknowledge greatness with reasonable assurance that what they celebrate is true deserved greatness that would still have been there even with no chemical help.

For example, let us just suppose that good evidence comes out that Pudge Rodriguez was only able to play more games at catcher then anyone else in history through the help of steroids? (Not saying he has used steroids). Does he then still deserve the same level of recognition of greatness and achievement? If you think he does then how does that not throw the whole frame of reference by which baseball fans measure true greatness over the years out of balance?

People can hate that some hate steroids in baseball. They can excuse and use rationalizations all they want, blame anyone they want but that still doesn't take away the fact that many fans want to be able to know with reasonable assurance that if someone hits 73 HRs in a season he did it on pure talent alone so they know where to place the accomplishment in historical perspective.

I wonder how much of those who hate that others hate steroids in baseball and use rationalizations just don't want to even consider that much of what we have seen in recent years just may not be true greatness after all?

[BoweryBoys]

Besides the issues of health concerns and kids maybe taking steroids because their MLB heroes do (which are relevant issues to all sports) isn't the only real relevant bottom-line points of steroids in baseball, do they belong in baseball or not, what players used, and of those that used did it make them play longer and put up better numbers then they otherwise may have been capable of?

I would go one further and say the only issue with steroids in baseball that really matters, besides the kids, is did steroid use distort the historical record? Many say it is only a game. That is true it is only a game but because of that the only thing that does really matter bottom-line is the outcome of games, seasons, and the historical record. The issue is whether steroids effects games, seasons and the historical record. I think it is clear that fans who feel that steroids do not belong in baseball are motivated by those concerns. What difference does it really make who one wants to blame? One can cloud the issue all they want but when evidence comes out that a certain player that put up huge numbers used steroids then fans and media will rightfully question that player and his numbers. Twisting it to the fans and media being the real bad guys won't change that.

[BoweryBoys]

of course the player is at fault for taking said substances. but it very rarely happens in a vacuum. So yeah, I definitely blame the establishment and those reporting on it because they share the blame for ALLOWING it to happen.

It makes little difference that it rarely happens in a vacuum. Life doesn't happen in a vacuum either and the bottom-line is that grown men of at least average intelligence and sanity are solely 100 percent responsible for the choices they make. No one forced a single player to ingest steroids just as no one forces a poor desperate person to commit a crime for money. Crime doesn't happen in a vacuum either and that still doesn't absolve people who can understand the difference between right and wrong from being responsible for their own actions. In the case of MLB players they have far less excuse and reason then a poor desperate person in need of money.

The sad thing is how deeply people feel about this issue. It seems split between those who don't like steroids in baseball, those who don't like that some don't like steroids in baseball, and those who just don't care. However, those who use the irrelevant arguments of what happens in other sports, what the government should be doing, others are also to blame, etc, miss the real points.

Baseball is a game where the frame of reference used to rate and judge greatness is a certain level of numerical statistical accomplishment. When something happens to certain numbers such as the number of 60 plus HR seasons between 1998 and 2001, and then evidence of steroid use begins to surface, fans are rightfully going to question those accomplishments and those players. Blaming others, making excuses, rationalizations, do nothing to take away that simple truth. What matters and the real point is fans being able to acknowledge greatness with reasonable assurance that what they celebrate is true deserved greatness that would still have been there even with no chemical help.

For example, let us just suppose that good evidence comes out that Pudge Rodriguez was only able to play more games at catcher then anyone else in history through the help of steroids? (Not saying he has used steroids). Does he then still deserve the same level of recognition of greatness and achievement? If you think he does then how does that not throw the whole frame of reference by wish baseball fans measure true greatness over the years out of balance?

People can hate that some hate steroids in baseball. They can excuse and use rationalizations all they want, blame anyone they want but that still doesn't take away the fact that many fans want to be able to no that if someone hits 73 HRs in a season he did it on pure talent alone so they know where to place the accomplishment in history and in perspective.

[sturg1dj]

Sturg, not sure what you mean by black and white in your post #74.

In an earlier post I commented on some of your words above, not a good example for a youngster to see the situation like you did, like I think you did.

In the above it appears that your saying Sammy may have done wrong, may not make the HOF but look he made all that money.
Did I misread your post, did I miss the point, maybe I did

no, I just think you are seeing a baseball career as the fairy tale shown in the old movies. All of the players would play for free and give their all at all times....and all of that. But in the real world this is their job and for someone like Sosa coming from where he came from and achieving what he did I say he did ok. and to be completely 100% honest I could give a rat's behind about the kids. You want them to learn right from wrong them maybe you (and by you I mean anyone who cries "think of the children") should become a mentor. Baseball players have their own lives, along with their families' lives to worry about before they worry for your life as well.

So boo hoo he is not going to be in the hall of fame...well he is also not working in a sweatshop or out in the fields...and neither is his family.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

no, I just think you are seeing a baseball career as the fairy tale shown in the old movies. All of the players would play for free and give their all at all times....and all of that. But in the real world this is their job and for someone like Sosa coming from where he came from and achieving what he did I say he did ok. and to be completely 100% honest I could give a rat's behind about the kids. You want them to learn right from wrong them maybe you (and by you I mean anyone who cries "think of the children") should become a mentor. Baseball players have their own lives, along with their families' lives to worry about before they worry for your life as well.

So boo hoo he is not going to be in the hall of fame...well he is also not working in a sweatshop or out in the fields...and neither is his family.


OK Sturg then I didn't misread your previous post #60. Your take is, so what if he used steroids, shamed himself and it may cost him a shot at the HOF, look at all the money he made, that was your thought in that post.
By using steroids he boosted his performance and that in turn raised his income, made him more money and now he and his family are insured they are well set financially.
Thats what your saying.

What Sammy was paid.

Let me start in 1994, the first year he got to at least a million.
1994---3 million
1998---8 million +
2000--11 million
2002--15 million
2005--17 million

Looks like Sammy was doing very good even in the 1990s. Your talking like Sammy was in the poor house before he went to PEDs.
I wonder what Sammy thinks, maybe he thinks he might have been better off not going down the PED road, making less money, but still a good amount and have a chance at the HOF.
I'm sure Sammy like all MLB players has that dream, making it to the HOF and he still may but does not look good but he has lots of money.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

The sad thing is how deeply people feel about this issue. It seems split between those who don't like steroids in baseball, those who don't like that some don't like steroids in baseball, and those who just don't care.


Pardon the chop job Bowery, of your post what I deleted.
What you stated, what I left remaining is pretty much what most of the debating is about on this board when the subject is PED use in baseball.

I could understand some pointing the finger at MLB, for not getting the jump on PED use earlier in time.
What I don't get is why they have a problem with those who do care for PED use in the game, I and some others are not as easy on the users.

Some can't accept the fact that baseball is now doing something about PED use. So they can't catch all the users, what does MLB do............forget about it, the plan is not perfect, keep dreaming.
They blame MLB, and the biggest joke some blame we the fans for craving for offense, the home run, hitters wanting to please us and then we turn on those that get caught. Come on, you really think these guys go down that road for us, or is to boost their performance for personal gain.

So we should go easy on them because of the things that were taking place in the game, the dirty neighborhood.............others were using, another lame excuse.

To all the complainers, I and some others are happy MLB is seeing the situation and taking action along with our thinking, catch those you can and punish them. Get off the sympathy for these guys, they know whats in store for those that get caught.
It's here accept it, now there is a program, all the complaining about past cheaters, how something should have been done earlier ( agree but no excuse) and the silly notion that some do it for us, just trying to keep up.

Stop passing the buck, while the complainers are at it accept defeat, it's not perfect but the program is here to stay.

All the lame excuses and crying is not doing those that got caught any good, getting what they deserve.

[sturg1dj]

OK Sturg then I didn't misread your previous post #60. Your take is, so what if he used steroids, shamed himself and it may cost him a shot at the HOF, look at all the money he made, that was your thought in that post.
By using steroids he boosted his performance and that in turn raised his income, made him more money and now he and his family are insured they are well set financially.
Thats what your saying.

What Sammy was paid.

Let me start in 1994, the first year he got to at least a million.
1994---3 million
1998---8 million +
2000--11 million
2002--15 million
2005--17 million

Looks like Sammy was doing very good even in the 1990s. Your talking like Sammy was in the poor house before he went to PEDs.
I wonder what Sammy thinks, maybe he thinks he might have been better off not going down the PED road, making less money, but still a good amount and have a chance at the HOF.
I'm sure Sammy like all MLB players has that dream, making it to the HOF and he still may but does not look good but he has lots of money.

I think you are making a big assumption that Sosa wasn't always on something. Steroids and other PED's are legal in the DR, so just because he was smaller doesn't mean he wasn't using something.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

I think you are making a big assumption that Sosa wasn't always on something. Steroids and other PED's are legal in the DR, so just because he was smaller doesn't mean he wasn't using something.

So, sounds like your saying, he could have been using and boosted his performance earlier than it is thought. That could be, the sad thing here is your message is still the same. If he used, so what if he got caught, shamed and maybe no make the HOF............he made lots of money, he and his family are set for life.

[Ace Venom]

If the Hall of Fame kicked out admitted amphetamine users and Gaylord Perry, I might be more sympathetic to people who say PED users don't belong in the Hall of Fame. You can justify keeping Pete Rose out of the Hall of Fame. You can't justify keeping McGwire and Sosa out based on the "cheaters" that are already in. I don't see anyone calling for the meth users and spitballers like Perry to be kicked out of Cooperstown, which only serves to make that museum a complete joke if you don't let the latest rule benders in. The door is open whether you like it or not.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

If the Hall of Fame kicked out admitted amphetamine users and Gaylord Perry, I might be more sympathetic to people who say PED users don't belong in the Hall of Fame. You can justify keeping Pete Rose out of the Hall of Fame. You can't justify keeping McGwire and Sosa out based on the "cheaters" that are already in. I don't see anyone calling for the meth users and spitballers like Perry to be kicked out of Cooperstown, which only serves to make that museum a complete joke if you don't let the latest rule benders in. The door is open whether you like it or not.

Is that a direct reply to my post, or just in general. If to me, no problem just so I know how to reply, my feelings.
Seldom have I made a big issue on whether a confirmed user gets in to the HOF. I don't vote and I don't care one way or the other but it's obvious it will effect the votes of some of the voters. I've even posted Sammy has a chance, slim chance unlike Barry who has the better chance.

Most of my posting on the subject deals with steroid use in the game and what MLB does in the way of a penalty, thats all, the HOF not an issue with me. What comments you find in my previous posts about the HOF were in reply to other posts.

Where I differ with some is all the lame excuses for those users. Blame on the owners, MLB and even the fans.
Then we hear the program is not perfect, some will escape detection. Thats true but what does MLB do, because it's not perfect forget it, lets use common sense never happen.
No matter what took place in the past, fair or unfair, this is where we are today and the players all know it, some fans have a problem with that, the program is in effect, accept it.
Do I agree MLB should have got on this program earlier than they did, I do but in the end the one who makes the choice, 100 percent to blame.

[ol' aches and pains]

If the Hall of Fame kicked out admitted amphetamine users and Gaylord Perry, I might be more sympathetic to people who say PED users don't belong in the Hall of Fame. You can justify keeping Pete Rose out of the Hall of Fame. You can't justify keeping McGwire and Sosa out based on the "cheaters" that are already in. I don't see anyone calling for the meth users and spitballers like Perry to be kicked out of Cooperstown, which only serves to make that museum a complete joke if you don't let the latest rule benders in. The door is open whether you like it or not.

That door hasn't opened for Mark McGwire, has it? I don't know, obviously, but I hope that starts a trend that keeps the juicers out of the Hall, which is diluted enough already.

[sturg1dj]

So, sounds like your saying, he could have been using and boosted his performance earlier than it is thought. That could be, the sad thing here is your message is still the same. If he used, so what if he got caught, shamed and maybe no make the HOF............he made lots of money, he and his family are set for life.

maybe, but you seem to refuse to look at this in a larger scope, instead only looking at this from the perspective of a baseball fan. There is more to life than the glory you can receive from your chosen profession. Sammy Sosa is more than a baseball player. I hope you realize that, and that every player in the league is more than a baseball player. He is 39 years old and his life as a baseball player is over. Yet, hopefully, that will only be half of his life, since he should have many more years to go. It is a shame that he did what he did and it will be a shame that he will not make the HOF, but life is more than that.

[Ace Venom]

That door hasn't opened for Mark McGwire, has it? I don't know, obviously, but I hope that starts a trend that keeps the juicers out of the Hall, which is diluted enough already.

It's a matter of perception. The door is open, but he needs the votes to get through the door. This is opposed to Pete Rose, who had the door slammed shut on him by the Hall of Fame itself. The door is not open to him in any form unless he gets reinstated.