Squeaky Fromme
yeah, that's squeeky ..or is that Polly?
couldn't agree more about Griffy Jr.
Damn, early bird gets the genuis points.
And I've said it before and I'll say it again: just because these athletes are on steroids doesn't mean that they didn't hit 700+ homeruns, or run the 100 in 6 seconds. Steroids or not, they actually did those things. It wasn't robots.
Now, if they are actually robots, then we have a problem.
bonds on steroids?! bull s**t!
Joe,
When will mlb start testing for roboticity?
Seriously, love you but your steroid point is retahded. They did those things, yes, but they CHEATED to do them, and that is why we resent them and discount their records. It's an unbelievably simple equation, no need to apologize for them now that they've been caught. Cheaters. Used. Illegal. Substances. To. Increase. Performance. And. All. Known. Records. Fell. Not. A. Coincidence.
Now if you wanted to make the argument that mlb didn't have a steroid policy so technically they broke no rules of their sport, at least you would have me on a technicality. They'd still be cheaters, though.
If you were just kidding, ignore me.
also, dlee, good call on the polly resemblance.
Not kidding at all. But this is well-covered territory.
Should Lawrence Taylor's records be wiped from the record books?
Oh, and I don't resent the players one bit for using 'roids. Dangerous, yes. Bad influence on the kids, yes. But so is crack.
By the way, I think this is a funny site:
http://www.thingsmygirlfriendand...rguedabout.com/
I'm going to post about 100 comments today. 
joe,
you have a point about football, but the situation is clearly different.
most people consider the modern football era to date back to the mid 60's. players have been taking steroids in football since then. in fact, many players from the 70's have stated that steroids were team policy. thus, at least lt would be compared to others who were using steroids. did the steroids improve? sure. did fitness/nutrition regimens improve? sure. but the clear demarkation between not-juiced and juiced is so clear in baseball that it becomes so much harder to ignore that things are so different that comparisons cannot even be made. how clear? consider
bonds himself. in all seasons until he was 34 he averaged 1 hr per every
16 at bats. after 34 1 hr per every 8 at bats. so it is not just that
the game has changed, but the performance of individuals has changed so much that comparing bonds to aaron, etc becomes impossible...
~as Kissel touched on, i think the key reason everyone hates "the juice" in baseball as opposed to football comes from the notion that the primary enjoyment of the game for a baseball junkie derives from history and statistics. Once those two elements lose their cred..
i agree with dlee.
it should be noted that over the years there have been things that have changed the history and statistics in baseball (inclusion of black/hispanic players, night games, relief pitchers, astroturf, uppers, stadium size, ball/bat construction, etc.) but steroids changed things so quickly and noticeably that there is simply a gut reaction that is hard to avoid. when the stats and appearance of your favorite player changes so dramatically it is just a completely different thing then the gradual changes over the last 30 years...
Puritans all of you.
you can't mess w/ the stats
because the ppl who would mess with them will just fuck it all up worse
How come no one talks about Babe Ruth playing in a park with a 256-foot RF foul pole?
Of the fact that another park was built specifically to enable him to hit more HRs?
Or that he never faced a black pitcher, and very few Hispanic ones?
Or that he he hit many HRs off pitchers who'd already thrown 150+ pitches in the game, or who had already tossed over 300 innings for the year?
i wanna hear them barry bonds answering machine tapes
he was a chronic boozer, man ..that more than evened the playing field.
bjl,
you are joking, right? everyone mentions those things (see above).
all of those things contributed to the statistics of ruth and those in that era. but the equivalent to the transformations made mid-career by the likes of bond (e.g. + 24 hr over personal best) or sosa (240 hr over a 4 year span) would be like next year having pitchers pitch with no pitcher's mound...
if you really break it down, ruth was't that good a player
true dat
ruth could take a pre-steroids bonds in a hot dog eating contest. I don't know if he could take kobayashi though.
So do you folks actually discount the performance of Bonds, Sosa, et al.? Are you not amazed by Ben Johnson running faster than the speed of sound? Are you not impressed with these feats? Regardless of whether their stats should be asterisked (for the love of god).
I'd also be interested to know if the anti-steroid posse thinks we have a sane approach to drug laws in this country.
joe,
I am kind of amazed with your angle on the steroids thing. i am not impressed by someone producing previously unheard of results by ingesting illegal substances that were designed to make them do just that. what's amazing about that? so ben johnson shaved 16/100ths of a second off a record with his ass swollen full of winstrol? that's amazing? wtf? 73 HR's while loaded with enough different chemicals to fuel a rocket? who gives a shit? why not just watch home run derby?
as fans we deserve to watch sports where there is some fairness between the competitors. the struggle of competition is what makes sports exciting and different than watching a movie of the week. any advantage gained by one competitor outside of the rules of the game --especially a huge and dramatic one like steroids -- compromises the sport and makes it worthless.
You should sart juicing. Maybe you'd be able to dunk again. Tell me you wouldn't love that.
Testicles Schmesticles.
Commenting by HaloScan.com
