southsider2k5 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 10, 2006 -> 11:26 AM) Yeah, because the NFL did such a great job of making sure people weren't on the juice. Bill Romanowski and the 2003 Carolina Panthers certainly appreciate the effort. Cheaters are always going to look for ways to cheat. I respect football for at least putting in things like *gasp* rules and *godforbid* penalties for things like drug usage and illegal activity, while the sports of baseball and basketball have acted like they done exsist and even become complicit in their coverups. It might not be perfect, but its better than the joke that my favorite sport became. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 10, 2006 -> 11:33 AM) Cheaters are always going to look for ways to cheat. I respect football for at least putting in things like *gasp* rules and *godforbid* penalties for things like drug usage and illegal activity, while the sports of baseball and basketball have acted like they done exsist and even become complicit in their coverups. It might not be perfect, but its better than the joke that my favorite sport became. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 10, 2006 -> 08:33 AM) Cheaters are always going to look for ways to cheat. I respect football for at least putting in things like *gasp* rules and *godforbid* penalties for things like drug usage and illegal activity, while the sports of baseball and basketball have acted like they done exsist and even become complicit in their coverups. It might not be perfect, but its better than the joke that my favorite sport became. Aside from Jim Miller being suspended...how exactly do we know that football has actually enforced those rules and not been complicit in the coverups? Like I said, we've got at least a couple major examples of guys in recent years who were juicing and who were never caught. A couple of them played in the Super Bowl. How exactly do we know that football hasn't been complicit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank the Tank 35 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 I have a lot to say about this subject, but I'll try to keep it as short as I can. I go to the gym all the time. I've known guys who were taking steroids. Honestly, it's not something that bothers me. There are many worse things you could be doing to your body. If you administer them correctly, the amount of actual harm you do to your body is rather minimal. In addition, these people keep their bodies in the best of conditions with proper nutrition, no drinking, no smoking, etc. What it amounts to is instead of a drinking vice, it's a roid vice. Let's put it simply, people with drinking vices peripherally make poor health choices in general. In my opinion, the negative effects of steroids have been well overblown by the media and the "mothers of America." However, when steroids enter the arena of a sport where personal records are what make players memorable, it is an outrage to me. Being a loyal follower of Frank Thomas since his rookie year, I am all the more affronted. To the best of my knowledge, FT was never a juicer. I could be wrong, in which case I would lose all the respect I ever garnished for him, but I do not think that is the case. He has a gigantic frame, and while he was always muscular, he was never unproportionally so. He carried around some extra "girth" which does not preclude him from roid usage, but why would someone carry a gut around if they didn't have to, slowing him down in the field? It's obvious, to me at least, that in the first stage of his career, he did not swing for the fences. His hrs were usually line drive shots and a product of his massive strength rather than an uppercut swing. Anyway, I don't think that I have to argue that point on this board, so I'll continue... Roid usage in baseball not only disgraces the game and everyone involved but especially the greatest hitter to ever don a White Sox uniform and my personal favorite player of all time. During the early and mid-90's it was the Thomas-Griffey show. They would compete for the hr crown with 40 homers a year. Now it seems every other team has at least one player who can hit that many. Not that I measure a player's worth by his hr totals, but so many people do. Now FT and KGJ are mere afterthoughts, great players in their prime but they can't measure up to the spectacular offensive players of the immediate past. These players that are jokes and frauds have had a detrimental effect on two of the better players in history because they have been overshadowed and tainted by the other players in this era. It makes me completely sick, and I can only wish the worst for the baseball careers of these individuals. I don't know what, if anything, can be done unfortunately. I have no faith in Selig to issue any penalties although I can always hope, I guess. Here's one of my worst fears... years down the road... Me: Frank Thomas was the best hitter of his generation. Grandkids: But look at Barry Bonds, he's got much better numbers. I think he was awesome. Me: He was a cheater! So was Giambi! He stole Thomas' MVP in 2000! Grandkids: Sure grandpa... (aside) you old cook. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 10, 2006 -> 12:09 PM) Aside from Jim Miller being suspended...how exactly do we know that football has actually enforced those rules and not been complicit in the coverups? Like I said, we've got at least a couple major examples of guys in recent years who were juicing and who were never caught. A couple of them played in the Super Bowl. How exactly do we know that football hasn't been complicit? A ton of guys get suspended from football every year. If you want to make it into a vast right wing conspiracy with guys not getting suspended, I would imagine you would need more evidence than 3 guys who managed to cheat the system. And just because they cheated the system doesn't mean the sport was complicit in it. I mean come on, do you have evidence that every hockey player isn't an alien brought in from Alpha Centauri? Of course not. But in football we aren't seeing stories like we are in baseball. In baseball we have antecodes coming out about multiple owners who purposefully either kept ignorant, or acted like a problem didn't exsist with their own players. I dont' get why you would assume the worst right away. Football has had a strict set of guidelines and the harshest testing and suspension rates of anything outside of the olympics. It might not be perfect, and shock upon shock, some people are working harder to cheat the system, vs just working hard to become a better player, but that doesn't excuse the lack of action on the parts of MLB and the NBA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin57 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 QUOTE(Frank the Tank 35 @ Mar 10, 2006 -> 01:27 PM) I go to the gym all the time. I've known guys who were taking steroids. Honestly, it's not something that bothers me. There are many worse things you could be doing to your body. If you administer them correctly, the amount of actual harm you do to your body is rather minimal. In addition, these people keep their bodies in the best of conditions with proper nutrition, no drinking, no smoking, etc. What it amounts to is instead of a drinking vice, it's a roid vice. Let's put it simply, people with drinking vices peripherally make poor health choices in general. In my opinion, the negative effects of steroids have been well overblown by the media and the "mothers of America." I would sure like to see some reference(s) to medical journals and the like to verify this statement. Everything I've heard (granted it's anecdotal in nature) has led me to believe that even in small dosages, steriods can cause big long-term problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samclemens Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Mar 8, 2006 -> 10:48 PM) No actually I am arguing: I can not make a good argument on the evidence unless I actually can see the evidence myself. How anyone in here can claim anything is beyond me. But in my experience I doubt that any criminal charges will come from it. That is just my gut feeling. you have substantially backtracked from your initial position of staunch bonds-apologist. just to confirm, are you seriously saying that you doubt bonds took steroids?? please, man! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 QUOTE(samclemens @ Mar 12, 2006 -> 09:21 AM) you have substantially backtracked from your initial position of staunch bonds-apologist. just to confirm, are you seriously saying that you doubt bonds took steroids?? please, man! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iWiN4PreP Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Bonds homered today Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 QUOTE(iWiN4PreP @ Mar 12, 2006 -> 08:50 PM) Bonds homered today Through sheer willpower alone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Actually I never said Bonds did or did not take steriods. My argument was "even if Bonds took steriods it wont matter", and I stand by that argument. If you want to go read through my posts and find a statement where I say "Bonds never took steriods" feel free. You wont. I made many statements on the fact that no prosecutor will touch the case, that baseball wont suspend him, etc. So no I have not backtracked, you just actually took the time to read my post instead of jumping to conclusions about my statements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Critic Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 QUOTE(iWiN4PreP @ Mar 12, 2006 -> 08:50 PM) Bonds homered today His bat was on steroids. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 QUOTE(The Critic @ Mar 15, 2006 -> 07:35 AM) His bat was on steroids. True, he's proving the critics wrong with his spring training bat. Good thing they test for HGH, he can prove he's clean this year as a result. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 QUOTE(The Critic @ Mar 15, 2006 -> 07:35 AM) His bat was on steroids. Do they test for cork? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 The Bonds books have at least caught the attention of 1 Congressman, who sent a letter to Selig asking for more details about his work during the 1998 and after. Link. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.