First Big Mac “did not want to talk about the past” at the congressional hearings.
Secondly as far as the hall of fame goes…baseball did not start drug testing until recently (last couple of years) so those who are in the hall may have been using something. Baseball needed players to get bigger and hit the ball farther after the strike. Baseball set themselves up for this and now are trying to make the ballplayers out to be the bad guys.
I guess we have to revoke reggie jackson’s hall of fame position since he took enough amphetamines to light up new york city.
I’ve seen pictures of him with his shirt off in promotional posters around the time he played with the angels (I must kill the queen!) and he looks pretty enhanced.
As far as lying in front of congress, I respectfully say-GIVE ME A BREAK!
I will quote the wise sage Jim Wendler here:
when asked what he thought about congress lambasting baseball players about not being trusted again because they lied about steroids, Wendler’s reply was “Taking morality advice from a congressman is like taking career advice from a crack whore”
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
Nate Dogg wrote:
mertdawg wrote:
I am a little suprised, because if he used steroids I would have thought he’d actually have some noticable muscle mass to show for it.
And I had just gotten used to the idea that he deserved to get into the hall of fame. Now-he’s out in my book.
Why shouldn’t he be allowed in? Because of steroid use?
Steroid use shouldn’t necessitate getting in or not. Almost all professional and Olympic athletes are/have been using steroids to gain a competitive edge. I don’t think it matters if he or anyone else is using.
If they work, then by all means, make it fair and let anyone use them if they want to.
Because it’s against the rules of baseball. We now have a rule designed to protect players from having to use steroids to be competitive-A rule that they wanted so they could play the game without having to use. And in his case, what caught my attention as far as getting him in to the hall was 9 straight years with 38+ homeruns. Hank Aaron had 8 total 40 homerun seasons in his career (tied for second behid Ruth with 11).
Over a 9 year period, Palmero was a grand total of 7 homeruns shy of 9 consecutive 40 hr years with 39, 39, 38, 43, 47, 39, 47, 43, 38. (in fact, I think its a record for consecutive 35+ homerun seasons.) Now I get the feeling he would have been retired a good 4-5 years ago. No 3000/500, maybe 2400/400.
[/quote]
I agree. Baseball is a game driven hugely by statistics, even more so than the other professional sports. It’s not just a matter of comparing today’s players against each other, but comparing them against those who came before (and I think it is a fairly safe assumption that there was not a level of steroid use similar to that today back in the 1950’s).
It’s really simple: the rule is not to use steroids so if you do, you should be punished. Should voters take that into consideration in looking at him for the Hall of Fame? I absolutely think so. Regardless of what you think of those rules on steroids is not the issue. Everyone has a set of rules in front of them they are meant to abide by. If you want to take the risk and not abide by them, no one’s fault but your own for the consequences of those actions.
And let’s keep one thing about the Hall of Fame in mind - it is NOT run by Major League Baseball. It’s a completely separate entity that makes up all its own rules and regulations. If it decides that a steroids offense makes you ineligible, that is completely up to them (I doubt they will take that course of action).
Do you guys realize that this is baseball, and thus nobody f*cking cares?
Seriously, leave it to baseball to bring boredom to the shoul-be-exciting topic of steroid use in professional sports … if it even is one.
Bastard!
[quote]Kuz wrote:
I agree. Baseball is a game driven hugely by statistics, even more so than the other professional sports. It’s not just a matter of comparing today’s players against each other, but comparing them against those who came before (and I think it is a fairly safe assumption that there was not a level of steroid use similar to that today back in the 1950’s).
It’s really simple: the rule is not to use steroids so if you do, you should be punished. Should voters take that into consideration in looking at him for the Hall of Fame? I absolutely think so. Regardless of what you think of those rules on steroids is not the issue. Everyone has a set of rules in front of them they are meant to abide by. If you want to take the risk and not abide by them, no one’s fault but your own for the consequences of those actions.
And let’s keep one thing about the Hall of Fame in mind - it is NOT run by Major League Baseball. It’s a completely separate entity that makes up all its own rules and regulations. If it decides that a steroids offense makes you ineligible, that is completely up to them (I doubt they will take that course of action).[/quote]
I agree too. And don’t forget about those who come after. The MLB cleans up baseball and we may never have sluggers like this again. But that doesn’t me they wouldn’t be every bit as good or better and wouldn’t have smashed the current records if they followed the same practices.
[quote]BFG wrote:
Do you guys realize that this is baseball, and thus nobody f*cking cares?
Seriously, leave it to baseball to bring boredom to the shoul-be-exciting topic of steroid use in professional sports … if it even is one.
Bastard![/quote]
BFG,
“Boots” LOVES baseball!
You guys crack me up! You act as if this is something new, and now every baseball player caught should be chastized!
Steroids in sports has been going on for decades! It only recently has been brought up, and probably for some political/financial gain, not because they actually care about the sport or the athlete’s safety or a “level playing field!”
If they wanted to crucify players for using, they might as well just eliminate the sport entirely, as I’m sure the majority do use or have used. Read Charlie Francis’ article about steroid use in the Olympics (in the T-Nation article archive).
Leave it up to the athlete to decide whether they want to use or feel they need to use. All it can do is increase strength and speed. Baseball is also largely dependent on eye-hand coordination, and I don’t know about steroids being able to help in that respect. Sure, being faster and stronger can help, but you still might not hit the ball if you don’t have the level of eye-hand coordination needed to make contact. It just gives you a more powerful hit!
But I don’t care anyway because I hate baseball! I just don’t see the big deal whether anyone is using. Every sport will need to be thoroughly examined if they want to do something about it, and no matter what, there are always ways around getting caught.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
I don’t fault him for whatever he takes. I fault him for lying in front of Congress.[/quote]
I agree with your first sentence completely, but isn’t that second sentence some kind of oxymoron.
Steroids turn a warning track shot into a homerun.
[quote]Nate Dogg wrote:
You guys crack me up! You act as if this is something new, and now every baseball player caught should be chastized!
Steroids in sports has been going on for decades! It only recently has been brought up, and probably for some political/financial gain, not because they actually care about the sport or the athlete’s safety or a “level playing field!”
If they wanted to crucify players for using, they might as well just eliminate the sport entirely, as I’m sure the majority do use or have used. Read Charlie Francis’ article about steroid use in the Olympics (in the T-Nation article archive).
Leave it up to the athlete to decide whether they want to use or feel they need to use. All it can do is increase strength and speed. Baseball is also largely dependent on eye-hand coordination, and I don’t know about steroids being able to help in that respect. Sure, being faster and stronger can help, but you still might not hit the ball if you don’t have the level of eye-hand coordination needed to make contact. It just gives you a more powerful hit!
But I don’t care anyway because I hate baseball! I just don’t see the big deal whether anyone is using. Every sport will need to be thoroughly examined if they want to do something about it, and no matter what, there are always ways around getting caught.[/quote]
Yeah, your ignorance of baseball shows because if you followed the history of the game, you would know why the steroids issue is an important one. But you don’t love the game, you admit you hate the game, so hence, you missed the whole point. Steroids in baseball IS something relatively new (maybe not in sports like football or track and field). Just look at the statistics starting in the late 80’s to now - an enormous offensive difference.
[quote]TriGWU wrote:
Steroids turn a warning track shot into a homerun.[/quote]
Bingo! And turns hits that might have been dribblers into singles or weak hits into the gap for singles into doubles. It changes the entire complexion of the game. I don’t know why some people don’t see this.
Again, they have never been allowed in baseball (although there never was a real policy with penalties in place to deter). Since that is the policy (and it is not going to change), then you need to handle it accordingly when punishing people. Drugs or none… everyone needs to be on a level playing surface. Those using AAS are not.
The one unique thing about steroids and baseball is that in baseball we saw the beginning of guys actually lifting weight, and those guys using steroids at virtually the same time. Very few players really lifed weights in the 70s-although Reggie Jackson was one, and he had to hide it until he was near the end of his career. I remember George Brett decide after a crappy season in '84 decide that he was actually going to follow a conditioning program during the offseason for once. He dropped from a “getting fat” 210 to a leaner, but not ripped 190 and lead the majors in slugging percentage and played his last full injury free season as a third baseman at the age of 32. If a guy like he had lifted weights and stayed in shape in the offseason, at 6-0 he could have been a RIPPED 190, or a very strong 210 and probably produced full all-star quality seasons for another 5-7 years, hit 35-40 homeruns and would have easily 3500 hits and close to 500 home runs. Schmidt was a wirey 6-2 195 and could have legitimately challenged 60 in a couple of years.
I think whatever Palmero took, it probably kept him in the game for 4-5 more years-I know at 34, I am more prone to pulls and strains, but gosh his arms are like 14 inches. I think he’s listed as 6-0 190 and he “plays” DH. If the guy knew anything about what he was doing he would be bigger and stronger for sure.
[quote]Dave2 wrote:
Now that prohormones are banned, I wonder what he’ll blame for this ‘accidental’ steroid ingestion? Ten bucks says that legal supplements will somehow take a hit here. [/quote]
Your rite, In his statement he says “Be carful what you put in your body and make sure you get your supplements from reputable source”.
[quote]Kuz wrote:
Steroids in baseball IS something relatively new (maybe not in sports like football or track and field). Just look at the statistics starting in the late 80’s to now - an enormous offensive difference.[/quote]
It’s not new. It’s just been brought up recently. There has been no real policy regarding steroid use. And it’s not the sole reason stats have changed over the years. Many actually rely on strength training and proper conditioning for the sport these days, which is something “new” in baseball over the past 20 years.
[quote]
Zap Branigan wrote:
I don’t fault him for whatever he takes. I fault him for lying in front of Congress.
lincono wrote:
I agree with your first sentence completely, but isn’t that second sentence some kind of oxymoron.[/quote]
I think you’re right on Congress, as most of them wouldn’t recognize the truth if it bit them in the @$$ – the concern is lying under oath…
[quote]dukefan4ever wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
McGwire is the only one that told the truth and everyone made fun of him.
Correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t remember McGuire admitting to anything.
[/quote]
Exactly. He did not admit or deny anything. He said he was not going to point fingers or name names.
He basically gave a big no comment, which was like an admission of guilt.
I found that much better than the blatant lying by the rest.
It is in human nature to find ways to better the next person. The question is how much are you willing to risk? With technology now, we could actualy start seeing robot enhanced athletes. That brings to light a new issues. Just a thought.
in case anyone cares, Palmiero tested positive for Winstrol:
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ap-palmeiro-stanozolol&prov=ap&type=lgns
[quote]trailer36 wrote:
in case anyone cares, Palmiero tested positive for Winstrol:
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ap-palmeiro-stanozolol&prov=ap&type=lgns[/quote]
I just heard that too on SI. Good thing is he cant blame legal supps, MRPs, energy drinks or even foods for this one.
[quote]mica617 wrote:
Bear in mind that most test don’t actually test for the “substace” itself, rather elevated levels of hormones in the body or out of balance ratios of the natural hormones in the body. For example- Testosterone. A failed test must be greater than 4x the “normal” T count OR greater than 400% of T to Estrogen ratio.
So I ask “What is normal?”. I know that the “normal” spectrum of Testosterone count is pretty broad. So, to me, it would stand to reason that one could be at the high end of the normal spectrum on T AND at the low end on E and fail the test due to ratios, correct?
Most people on this forum (that aren’t “juicing”) would probably fail these tests, as we tend to try to raise endogenous T production and suppress E through diet and supplementation (M and Alpha Male, perhaps?).
I would think, however, that high profile athletes like Palmeiro would be on top of this and take measures to insure that they remain in the safe “window” of hormone balance.
Either that, or he was juicing…[/quote]
I doubt an Alpha Male + M stack would quadruple a normal man’s testosterone level. I’ve done it and feel like my testosterone was doubled, but definitely not quadrupled. Biotest’s supplements aren’t THAT good, at least not yet.