mik3 1 Report post Posted February 11, 2008 The most hilarious part about all this is Selig speaking out against it when he was in control as drugs started really booming. There were steroids behind him, but they took off because he turned a blind eye to it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jason Harris 31 Report post Posted February 11, 2008 You guys are obviously entitled to your opinions, but there are plenty of people who don't want to see a portion of the players using performance enhancing drugs. When 20% of the players are using PED's, they obviously gain a huge advantage over those who don't wish to take the drugs whether for health or legal reasons. Further, baseball particularly is protective of its historical records, something that PED's have made a mockery of. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mik3 1 Report post Posted February 11, 2008 I'd say Caminiti's 65% on something was a good number, though I'd assume more.One of the many things that annoys me out of this is the people who think these are all the people that have used steroids + the BALCO case. Forgetting that these were the names they SORTA got using only two guys.This whole report wasn't thoroughly researched nor was it very widespread. They found guys that were trying to not get big sentences, so they got what they could. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chadd 916 Report post Posted February 11, 2008 Selig dropped the ball completely on the whole thing but Congress has no business getting involved in any way shape or form. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jason Harris 31 Report post Posted February 11, 2008 mik3, I was trying to be conservative with 20%, but 65% seems high. There are a lot of players who could be using legal over-the-counter products, giving them a look that borders on steroids or HGH. That said, I read a study a few months ago that claimed somewhere around 22% of all OTC products were tested as containing steroids. If I knew that EAS' Steroid Ripping Whey Protein could give me the benefits of steroids while having a fallback excuse, I'd use that. Still, if 65% are using PED's, then a third of the players are at a disadvantage, and I don't think the answer is as simple as telling them to start taking the PED's.***********************chadd, I'm not sure what I think of Congress' involvement, because this investigation would have gone nowhere without the threat of perjury in front of Congress. I believe one of Clemens' lawyer's arguments to discredit McNamee is he originally told investigators that he never injected steroids to Clemens. The lawyers are presenting it as he obviously made up false testimony for financial gain, versus the truth of he'd rather not go to jail for perjury.Selig may have botched it, but I believe the MLBPA is the most powerful union in America. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mik3 1 Report post Posted February 11, 2008 Well, about the 65%, you have to remember a TON of these coaches in places like Venezuela/DR hand out this stuff to 16 year olds like it's candy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DarkStar50 679 Report post Posted February 13, 2008 Roger Clemens is a DMW-Dead Man Walking. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jason Harris 31 Report post Posted February 13, 2008 Interesting that MLB and NFL are meeting with Congress today.The thing I find funny about Canseco's affidavit is I could have sworn his ghost writer said something different in his book. My memory is the book said something along the line that Clemens never acquired/used PED's in front of Canseco, but Clemens had asked him numerous questions about the benefits of PED's, so Canseco assumes he may have started using. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BigDipper 0 Report post Posted February 13, 2008 You know....with all the shit going on in the world today, war, terrorism, drugs coming in from foreign countries and being sold to young kids, aids, the economy apprantly heading to recession, why should congress honestly give a shit about whats going on with baseball, its the leagues problem and it should be dealt with by the league. If congress could sink that effort into something productive like getting drugs off the streets and away from kids we would all be better off. I think its absolute ridiculousness. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fire0nIce228 1 Report post Posted February 13, 2008 You know....with all the shit going on in the world today, war, terrorism, drugs coming in from foreign countries and being sold to young kids, aids, the economy apprantly heading to recession, why should congress honestly give a shit about whats going on with baseball, its the leagues problem and it should be dealt with by the league. If congress could sink that effort into something productive like getting drugs off the streets and away from kids we would all be better off. I think its absolute ridiculousness.QFTAmen Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RadioGaGa 162 Report post Posted February 13, 2008 You know....with all the shit going on in the world today, war, terrorism, drugs coming in from foreign countries and being sold to young kids, aids, the economy apprantly heading to recession, why should congress honestly give a shit about whats going on with baseball, its the leagues problem and it should be dealt with by the league. If congress could sink that effort into something productive like getting drugs off the streets and away from kids we would all be better off. I think its absolute ridiculousness.They even said sa this thing was starting, that there would be many calls for a break so the Congressional Member (or whatever they are called) could vote...I'm assuming on things of a certain level of importance. The 2 main guys, said they wouldn't be voting today. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jason Harris 31 Report post Posted February 13, 2008 If congress could sink that effort into something productive like getting drugs off the streets and away from kids we would all be better off. I think its absolute ridiculousness.Congress' position is this is an attempt at the war on illegal drugs.At this point, I will agree it might be possible that some level of steroids and HGH produces better physical strength/stamina without severe side affects (although even Canseco admits he needed to drop a size in his undies). As one guy who used steroids once said to me, "Do you think a glass of milk is generally healthy? How about 100 glasses? Well, that's what happens to a lot of guys on 'roids. They have no idea what they are doing, what drugs to take and when to cycle. So when one drug stops having an affect on the body and they still want to get bigger, instead of cycling to something else, they start doubling and tripling their dosages, which does bad things."Who has better access to information on PED's, the trainers who have essentially received a doctorate on it or the kid from Alabama who weighs 195 but dreams of being a college OL? In general, do kids show much restraint about any drug?It's obvious Congress views these investigations as "getting drugs off the streets and away from kids." They're hoping to convey the message that PED's are illegal substances. The downside is some of our "heroes" are going to be disgraced as a result. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mik3 1 Report post Posted February 13, 2008 It was fun watching Waxman move anyone along who questioned the BS Mitchell report. Still feel Roger did something. More than ever I feel they don't have enough to pin anything to him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites