lvjeremylv

QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 06:44 PM) Thats nice that your drug free, millions of American's arent. As out of whack as this country is these days, drug users are still in the minority. Even if they weren't, that still wouldn't make it OK, as drugs ruin the lives of those who use them and those around them. Drug abuse of all kinds needs to be addressed by "the powers that be" to help preserve this great nation from going down the sewer. I agree completely, and I believe that will come with time. We're just scraping the tip of the iceberg with the problem of steroids and the youth of America. I don't necessarily think that's the main purpose of the hearings they had today. The hearings today had to do with 1 specific case, which is Roger Clemens. Roger, I believe - based on what I see on the back of his baseball cards as well as his conduct today under oath before Congress- is a bold-faced liar and he's backed himself into a corner from which he has absolutely no escape. He could have admitted whatever he did and simply lost his baseball legacy. But instead of that, he's going to go to prison for an undetermined length of time while his family sits and home and waits for him to get out. Very unwise decision. You're right, putting people like Clemens and Bonds in prison is probably not going to stop a high school kid with NFL or MLB aspirations from taking a shortcut to try to get there. But what this does do is bring to light a real problem that is present with the young athletes of America. The problem is probably more widespread than we know, and it could be causing some serious, serious damage to our kids. That's something that needs to be addressed as soon as possible at every level. From the government, to the education system, to the house at the end of the block. Parents really need to take a pro-active role in educating their children on the dangers and risks that are associated with all drugs, including steroids. Well I don't know how much of the hearing you watched today, but the subject of children came up on many occasions. And if you saw the hearings back in March of 2005 with Sosa, Schilling, Palmeiro, etc, they also mentioned it there too. Perhaps not to the extent that it should be, though. The report itself would not be admissible, but the persons mentioned in the report would be subpoenaed and they would be asked to testify before the grand jury. Then they would be in the same position that Andy Pettitte and Roger Clemens are in: lie and you're going to prison. As someone mentioned, the feds are coming after Tejada and if he lies, that will be the end of his career. B12 my ass.

QUOTE(Markbilliards @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 06:12 PM) Lots of people in baseball used and still use PED on every team, we just have to accept it while MLB "tries" to contain it, because the use is far too widespread to even hope it can be contained. Ask a scout, I know everyone here knows one. Everyone on here knows a scout? I don't.

QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 04:48 PM) I dont care whether or not adults are taking drugs. You don't? I do, and so do tens of millions of other people who are drug free. These players are role models who children look up to, and steroid use among the youth of America is a real problem. It's not solely because of what's going on in MLB, but it certainly isn't helping. See my above statement. What can you do about things that can't be tested for? Nothing. But there are tests for types of steroids and there are tests that can be done for HGH. Some testing is better than no testing. Of course you can't foil every type of designer drug. That's a given. Tejada isn't an aging veteran, and he'll be going down for perjury. The feds don't take kindly to that. And the people that they've "gone after", such as Palmeiro, Sosa, McGwire, Clemens, etc...were some of the best players of our generation. So they aren't just going after the old players - they're going after people that otherwise would have been remembered as some of the all-time greats. And now they'll be remembered for what they really were - cheating, lying, drug abusing scumbags.

QUOTE(RME JICO @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 04:50 PM) Brady Anderson hit 50 HRs in 1996 and no one ever questioned whether he was taking anything. Well in 1996 it wasn't known by the public what was going on. It's clear now that Brady Anderson did not hit a legitimate 50 homers.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 04:19 PM) How about you all speculate on Sox players taking illegal drugs in your heads instead of on this board? How about if you don't like a topic, don't read about it or further contribute to it? The people dictate what's discussed on this board, not you.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 03:33 PM) So why not 2006? Jermaine Dye hit 44 homers, and he's never gotten anywhere close to that in his entire career, Joe Crede had by far the best year of his career, Konerko had a very good year as well, and where did this Matt Thornton guy coming from, putting up a 3.33 ERA? Good point on Dye. I've already thought something was up with the great year he had in 2006. Again, I hope not though. I would like to believe that all of the Sox players' achievements have been based on merit and hard work and not thanks to a vile. But to have your best offensive year at the age of 32 seems suspicious. His best year before 2006 was in 2000 when he batted .321 with 33 bombs and 118 RBI in 601 at-bats for the Royals. In 2006 he hit .315, 44 bombs, and 120 RBI in 539 at-bats. In the case of Crede, almost all hitters have their best years from the ages of 26-28. In 2006, he was 28. Paulie's 2006 wasn't much better than his 2004 and 2005. And Thornton was always gifted with a good arm. Like someone mentioned in a different post (which I agreed with), perhaps working with Don Cooper was what he needed to get it figured out.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 02:32 PM) You basic analysis is " this guy had a good year, so he must be on something." Why not claim "this guy had a good year, so he must be working on a new program or with a new coach?" Again, if they used roids or PED in 2005 to win, why didn't they stay on them in 2006 when they sucked? Or why did they suck if they stayed on them? Why is the same question being asked again? There are a number of reasons why a player would decide to stop cheating. I don't feel a need to cover the few that I mentioned again. And sure, it's possible that working with Don Cooper made that much of a difference in those players' performances. I've never said it wasn't. I simply raised the possibility of impropriety.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 02:24 PM) Well right now you're turning it into a witch hunt with no evidence other than "hey, these guys all had a great year when we won the World Series." Provide some factual evidence, not speculation or weark analysis, before trying to slander some of our players from our great team in 2005. I don't have any factual evidence (how on Earth could I?), other than the stats that I provided. Those stats, by the way, are not "weak analysis". They are legitimate facts that I took a few minutes to compile. And I didn't say "These guys all had a great year when we won the World Series". I said "These guys all had a great year when we won the World Series after being very mediocre for years before (and years after) that. Big difference. Please don't confuse raising a legitimate question with a witch hunt.

Maybe the feds want to get in touch with Roger's nanny so they can check for a green card and then deport her. Start working on the immigration problem while dealing with steroids in MLB. Kill 2 birds with 1 stone.

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 02:21 PM) And its irrelevant anyway, because you don't use steriods/ HGH only to get bigger. No, you don't use them only for that purpose - but that's an end result of it. So a change in body shape, structure, or build is certainly not irrelevant.

QUOTE(Controlled Chaos @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 02:17 PM) Yeah and you probably missed the lady that gave Roger a platform just to talk a little bit about how much hard work he puts in to stay in such great shape. Then she pulls up a big ass poster board with pictures of Clemens from different years of his career and says something like...I'm not an expert, but you look the same size in all these. Yeah that lady acted like a 13 year old fan. She seemed star struck. And if you compare Roger's body when he was with the Red Sox to what it is now, there is a difference. Anyone with vision greater than 20/400 can see that.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 01:49 PM) Don't even tell me that you were ignorant to the fact that there might be an issue of PEDs. C'mon. Juiced balls? I don't think so. We were talking about this in '98. We were whispering about it in '88 with the Bash Brothers. We didn't want Bonds to break Aaron's record because he's an asshole. Steroids was second. I'm not saying we are the only ones, but we are partially to blame. And as for Donaghy, I wasn't talking about the NBA, I was talking about fans thinking they are crooked. You're right, though, the NBA acted swiftly and smartly and it isn't nearly as bad as it could've been. I actually was ignorant and naive when it came to MLB and performance enhancing drugs. When the HR chase of '98 happened, I was only 17, so I really didn't know what steroids were - I wasn't a meat head athlete who dealt with that stuff - and didn't know there was a possibility of it being a widespread problem in sports. Now that I'm older and (a little) wiser, it's pretty obvious what was going on and how long in fact it's been going on. And it's time someone did something about it.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 01:46 PM) Depending on how long you think David Stern knew about the allegations. Some people think he knew about it for quite some time Allegations are one thing. Proof is another. Once the NBA and David Stern had the necessary evidence, that was the end of it.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 01:33 PM) Just like the Donaghy situation tarnished ALL referees in basketball, whether they are or not. The only flaw in that statement is this - the NBA did not turn a blind eye to the situation and pretend it didn't exist. They dealt with it swiftly and strongly, and that helped to greatly minimize any damage that could have been done to the sport. If baseball had dealt with steroids as swiftly and strongly in the 80's (70's?) instead of allowing it to spread and grow because of greed, we wouldn't be having this discussion today.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 01:38 PM) On a side note, Rep. Waxman is one weird lookin' dude. I don't know his name, but the chairman looks like a rat.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 01:33 PM) We, as fans, are also partly to blame. WE like the records being broken. WE like to see players do things that we, as fans, only wish we can do. WE show up to the games to see these things. Throw harder, hit farther, run faster...this is a no win situation. The game isn't ruined but it is certainly tarnished for a very long time. The problem is, they are all liars, true or false. I don't know of 1 real fan who would want a cheater to have any amount of success, much less break any records. These players broke records under false pretenses, and those who did should be ashamed of themselves. I don't see us fans as being partially to blame. Just because we...LOL the chairman just OWNED Roger, who tried to chime in when his time to talk was over. Anyway, just because the fans show up to the ballpark and cheer, that doesn't make it OK for those players we're cheering for to cheat the game and lie to the world.

QUOTE(TheBigHurt @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 01:29 PM) Wow. McNamee just got owned. Yeah this stuff is pretty intense lol. I'm glued to this hearing.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 01:19 PM) Strange, because thats exactly how your arguments sound, lol I know, lol. That's because I seem to be the only one who thinks it's POSSIBLE. I'm kind of being forced to play devil's advocate, which I don't mind doing, but in doing so it seems like I'm convinced that something was going on. I'm not, but I wish I could know for sure.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 01:04 PM) Then how do you explain the 83-79 Cardinals? It doesn't matter as long as you get to the playoffs because anything can happen. Neither baseball nor Congress will get to the bottom of this problem. It isn't about McNamee and Clemens...or Pettitte or Palmeiro or McGwire or Canseco. It's about steroids and baseball. You want to do something about it...lock Selig, Fehr and a mediator in a room and FIGURE IT OUT! Congress may not figure it out, but they're doing a hell of a lot more than anyone in baseball ever did. And if you think that Bud Selig and Donald Fehr are the 2 culprits, you're sadly mistaken. How about the owners who knew it was going on for the past 20 years and did nothing about it? How about the players who themselves weren't taking steroids but saw it going on and did nothing about it? And what about the players who had needles stuck in their asses while defrauding the fans, the record books, and ruining the reputation of the greatest sport ever invented? Those greedy bastards tarnished a great game for one reason - greed. Greed for money, greed for fame, and greed for legacy. Well now they have their money, but to go along with that they have soiled reputations, a complete lack of respect, and the disdain of millions of fans all over the world. I hope the millions was worth their dignity and pride.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 12:56 PM) Since it happened in one season and that player went back to being mediocre, how about calling it a "fluke?" If it was performance-enhancing drug related, why would they suck the next year if they continued to use them? Why would they stop using them? Several flukes in the same bullpen? Interesting coincidence. There are lots of reasons why an athlete might stop taking performance enhancing drugs. Fear of getting caught; guilt from cheating; no longer needing them since they achieved their objective (whatever that may be); wanting to stop before putting their body in greater danger. Those are 4 possible answers. I don't want to make it sound like I for sure believe that the 2005 Sox were up to no good. I really hope that the stars aligned that year and everything worked out in our favor. It was the greatest moment of my sports life, and if it came to light that there were HGH or steroids involved, it would greatly disappoint me and tarnish that entire year of my life. But to dismiss the possibility categorically is not prudent.

QUOTE(Vance Law @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 12:46 PM) Did players ever have career years in, like, the 1950s or 60s or 70s or 40s or 30s or 20s? Players have career years all the time. It's going to happen at some point in everyone's career. But to me, when it happens to a number of players on the same team in the same year, that raises the proverbial red flag.

QUOTE(RME JICO @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 12:11 PM) Holy cow, and how he got injured right when he came of the stuff. Man that sucks. Also, there is no way Cal Ripken played that many games in a row without some PEDs. Buehrle's no-hitter has HGH written all over it. Jenks consecutive innings streak was not aided by Ginseng, probably Andro. Your sarcasm is noted. But it's suspicious whenever a player goes from being very, very mediocre over a large period of time, to being dominant. To suggest otherwise is naive. Frank, when healthy, has always put up good numbers. He didn't start hitting home runs and being a stud overnight like a lot of players do and have.

QUOTE(fathom @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 12:02 PM) And Raffy tested positive! Thanks for proving my point. I'm sure we could all speculate on players we think were on PEDs then and now. However, it's absolutely pointless at this time. Who cares...we beat three teams in the playoffs that had some of the most suspicious possible juicers on their teams in all of baseball, including Clemens and Pettitte. If my team cheated to win, I would care. And so would any true fan of the sport. Without integrity, you have nothing. It was merely a statement that any player who uses HGH, steroids, etc will not necessarily use them for a prolonged time. The goal for some might be to win a championship.

QUOTE(fathom @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 11:26 AM) I think the only thing they were on was a hot streak. Since there was steroid testing in 2005, that would mean they would have had to be on HGH. I highly doubt they would have stopped using it then in 2006, when these guys sucked. A season long hot streak? For so many pitchers on the same team? I don't know about that. And if you think that there weren't any players still taking steroids in 2005 you are sadly mistaken. Rafael Palmeiro, who wagged his finger at the world while under oath before congress, tested positive, and he was basically at the tail end of his career. If he was still using after denying it so strongly, then anyone could have been using. I can see a player using it for a short time, getting a desired result, and then quitting. The payday for having a career year is millions of dollars, which would be very tempting for an underachieving player nearing the end of his playing days. One final payday is alluring.

QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Feb 13, 2008 -> 11:37 AM) Its fascinating that congress doesnt have anything better to do. I guess they already fixed all the problems with the govt so its time to fix the problems with other businesses? Eh Congress does millions of things at the same time. This notion that they stop everything just because they're working on the steroid investigation is false. It was up to baseball to fix this problem, and they turned a blind eye to it for the better part of 2 decades. I'm glad someone is stepping in and trying to do something about it. It's unfortunate that the government has to intervene, but had they not, the problem would still be rampant.