PDA

View Full Version : Why A Rod, Clemens, and Bonds should be in HOF



Strikeout king
02-11-2009, 05:44 AM
Please read my article and tell me what your opinion is


MLB has gone through so many changes from when it has first started till now. From smaller ball parks to better equipment and this "steriod era" is no different. As much as we dont want to admit it, we need to wake up and realize that steriods were once part of this game that we love. Players such as Micky Mantle and Babe Ruth had to hit a ball 500 feet just to hit a homerun and thats no exaggeration. What if they were able to hit in these parks today? Babe Ruth wouldve had video game home run numbers. Baseball built smaller parks, moved on and no one complained. Technology improved and equipment that has gotten better both couldve been so helpful to players back then but thats just how it is. Even new instant replay on homeruns and big plays could have been useful, its not fair but again thats how things are.

Now we are living in the steriod era. 80 players were named in the Mitchell report. 104 other names tested positive in 2003 and im sure a lot of other names who we will probably never know have taken them. This is just how things were. of course people wanted a edge. MLB told players not to take them but never really enforced them. Thats like just telling your child not to do drugs but never really doing anything about it. Shortening ball parks and improving technology back in the day for Babe Ruth wouldve been like giving him steriods and telling him to go out and knock the ball out every game, its not fair to players back then but we moved on and no one complains because its part of the learning process of the game. We know its kind of unfair and not the players fault, thats how organzations and MLB wanted to change it. Steriods were once part of the game to, its not like only 10-20 players took steriods. This was MLB fault again for not enforcing these rules and making it apart of baseball. Its not fair to players who didnt use steriods and im not saying steriods isnt considered cheating but we just have to know thats just how things were and move on. Baseball is like life, there will always be room for improvement but there will be mistakes along the way.

The owners of MLB need to be responsible enough and have some common sense. Baseball players are human, they will make mistakes. You must strongly enforce these important rules early in the game if you really dont want players to break them. MLB messed up big time and now it was part of the game. If you find a suitcase with $500,000 in it are you gonna return it to authorities like your suppost to or keep it? Many people would return it because it would be the right thing to do but a lot of people (even good people) would keep it because it would help them finacially but might get caught. It was the same way with players finding steriods that can help them and not really thinking they could get introuble because the rule wasnt really being enforced.

This is why A rod, Clemens and even Barry Bonds should be hall of famers and i personally hate Barry Bonds. Sure Bonds, Clemens, McGwire and a whole lot of players are lairs but they have put up amazing numbers. Unless there is information about them using steriods after 2003 when MLB actually really cared then they should be in the hall of fame because MLB helped steriods be apart of the game. its not fair but baseball is still in a learning process, a lot of things that baseball has gone through wasnt fair at all, besides steriods. Thats why baseball is still not perfect but its getting better everyday. If baseball had the same rules, ball parks, equipment and technology since day one then these records would make more sense and we would really know who the real home run king would be but we all know that would be impossible.

Barry L Bonds
02-11-2009, 06:34 AM
Yes everyone that is qualified should be in the hall of fame.The old guys used like everyone else probably since the 30's used speed aka greenies aka amphetamines. For that don't know Greenies are banned PED as of 2006. Think about that for a second. This PED has been around since the 30's and it was used by everyone like it was coffee or water.

You got pitchers like Gaylord Perry who for his whole career cheated the game yet he is in the hall fame? Spit Balls? Are you kidding me?

Speed aka greenies aka Orange pills aka red juice = Amphetamines.
Cork Bats?
Spit Balls?

Cheating in baseball has been around in since way back. It didn't start in this era, people just started to make a fuzz (Goverment) about is all.

This new 2003 report of 104 players who tested positive is out their and if they don't release the names then how do we know who is clean? Is Griffey on it? Is Pujols on it? Dunn? Vlad? Manny? Ortiz? Berkman? Thome? Nomar? Ordonez? Sexson

And then what about pitchers? You see where i am going with this.

GiantYankees
02-11-2009, 09:10 AM
blog

DirtyThirty
02-11-2009, 09:28 AM
shut up none of them belong in.

cambovenzi
02-11-2009, 12:28 PM
many points confused, or i dont agree with.

1st off i really really doubt that the players on the Mitchell report are all different than the list of 104 that tested positive in 03. you make it sound like its a completely different list of guys.

many players used steroids, and other PED's.
if they are found out, and you reward them with a HOF birth how does that look?
im sure many people will not vote many of the roided up players in for awhile.
you act like its OK that they roided up and tainted the game, just b/c it wasnt put in the rule book until ~2003. its not OK. it was against the law way before then, and it obviously helped many players illegally recover from injury and put up better numbers.

sure the MLB could have been alot stricter earlier on.
but its not their fault alot of people were taking them.
the players themselves made the decision, knowing it was illegal.
lots of people cheating doesn't make it right.

whether you condone or forgive steroid users or not, many HOF voters will not.
either way it will be interesting to see how it works out.
i think some of the guys might still get in, but it will hurt their chances.

theuuord
02-11-2009, 12:30 PM
shut up none of them belong in.

great point!

:rolleyes:

Havoc Wreaker
02-11-2009, 12:52 PM
Bonds = In :-p

mike155
02-11-2009, 01:12 PM
Smaller ballparks, not illegal and everyone plays in the same parks.

Better tech., same thing

I personally can stomach someone using a spit ball, emory board, sandpaper, or whatever on the field more than somebody being shot up in the backside with chemicals in the backrooom of some gym.

Steroids, ILLEGAL. They have been for quite some time now. Not everyone has used steroids. There are actually some players that have respect for the game and its history and the players that played the game before they were even born.

An easy fix would be to take all the numbers from the year(s) that a player was proven to take PED or admitted to and erase them. Will all the "tainted" stats be erased? No, but it's alot better than what MLB has done up to this point, NOTHING!

Sorry A-Rod, but you now have 397 HRs instead of 553. Give the 2003 MVP award to Delgado and the millions you got in award bonuses back to the Rangers.

Same goes for you Giambi. Don't even get me started on Bonds, McGwire, Sosa.

theuuord
02-11-2009, 01:16 PM
Smaller ballparks, not illegal and everyone plays in the same parks.

Better tech., same thing

I personally can stomach someone using a spit ball, emory board, sandpaper, or whatever on the field more than somebody being shot up in the backside with chemicals in the backrooom of some gym.

Hypocritical. Either take all cheating as cheating or don't take any of it. You can't draw arbitrary lines about what is "okay" cheating and what is "not okay" cheating.


Steroids, ILLEGAL. They have been for quite some time now. Not everyone has used steroids. There are actually some players that have respect for the game and its history and the players that played the game before they were even born.

Steroids were illegal in US law but not according to MLB rules until after the 2003 season. So if you want to remove every player who has ever broken the law... You've got a long list.

(P.S.: Lots of players before any of us were ever born cheated, too. Lots of them. Baseball has a long and wonderful cheating history.)


An easy fix would be to take all the numbers from the year(s) that a player was proven to take PED or admitted to and erase them. Will all the "tainted" stats be erased? No, but it's alot better than what MLB has done up to this point, NOTHING!

Okay. You want to do that? Start with Mays and Aaron and move forward. Actually, you can probably start earlier than that.


Sorry A-Rod, but you now have 397 HRs instead of 553. Give the 2003 MVP award to Delgado and the millions you got in award bonuses back to the Rangers.

Same goes for you Giambi. Don't even get me started on Bonds, McGwire, Sosa.

Will those teams give back the money that they generated in revenue from having those players to the fans? Not a chance. So why should the players give back the money for doing something that the MLB essentially encouraged during their tenure?

Jilly Bohnson
02-11-2009, 01:24 PM
You can't keep out a top 5 pitcher ever, a top 5 position player, and a guy who when all is said and done will also be a top 10 position player. You can't.

xdoubleZx
02-11-2009, 01:30 PM
i agree that any type of steroid use before 2003 should be completley ignored.. why? it wasnt against the rules of baseball and you have no idea how far back it goes.. back in the day it is claimed you had better pitching, yet smaller guys were hitting just as many home runs in larger ball parks..... HOW??? these days you hardly see twigs hitting home runs.. evry one in baseball works out six days a week. it is a requirement.. how much weight lifting went on back in the day? another thing is 90% of the players who have been cought for useing steroids prior to 2003 all used them for one reason, when they were injured to heal faster....... yeah, there are some like a-rod who used to get that little extra pop........ but whatever, it was aloud and legal then........... let it go...... baseball should just drop it all and move on...

Strikeout king
02-11-2009, 01:54 PM
The fact is way more then 104 players have done it and possibly in not only this this era and a lot of big time players. if you combined every player who has cheated in this game who could have used steriods, Spit balls, corked bats etc that we will never hear about then that number would be WAY over just 104 players. The HOF would possibly have a lot of players who have cheated. THESE PLAYERS ARE HUMAN. More then half of players are not THAT loyal. Welcome to life. Everyone makes it seem as if they would not hurt a fly. Thats just the image that there organization needs you to think for your money. Like i said in my blog "baseball is still in a learning process". When MLB fixes there holes like the salary cap (if they want to), instant replay, stronger steriod testing, whatever else that needs to be done and when baseball is finnaly "perfect" with no holes, thats when we could have a strong opinion about players and MLB would have the right to kick out those players and show us an example that they dont want that in there game. Its MLB's game, not ours or the players, they are the ones who couldve stoped this controversy.
Let these players in the HOF and move on with baseball, admit that this was MLB fault. anyone else who breaks this steriod policy again and would not be MLB fault should officially called a cheat because anyone they would be trying to bring back an era that were not proud of (just like the negro leagues) and should not step foot near the HOF and this is something that we need to say, okay it happened and we made a mistake. were sorry, lets move on and make this not happen again

JDIsMyGod23
02-11-2009, 02:05 PM
You can't keep out a top 5 pitcher ever, a top 5 position player, and a guy who when all is said and done will also be a top 10 position player. You can't.

I read this as the... "You just can't do it on your own, you can't!" commercial. :laugh2:

papipapsmanny
02-11-2009, 03:42 PM
why they shoudlnt? they got got cheated they dont deserve anything

get caught cheating on a test u get a 0 and punished.

same concept

Red_Sox_89
02-11-2009, 03:49 PM
why they shoudlnt? they got got cheated they dont deserve anything

get caught cheating on a test u get a 0 and punished.

same concept

Never thought of it that way. I didn't want them to get in, and I have a big long list of reasons why, but I can just use that from now on :D

07MVPPatBurrell
02-11-2009, 04:11 PM
they shouldn't be. they are cheaters.

Zep
02-11-2009, 04:12 PM
why they shoudlnt? they got got cheated they dont deserve anything

get caught cheating on a test u get a 0 and punished.

same concept

Guess we have to take away those SB's the Pats won then huh?

;)

misterd
02-11-2009, 04:20 PM
Yes everyone that is qualified should be in the hall of fame.The old guys used like everyone else probably since the 30's used speed aka greenies aka amphetamines. For that don't know Greenies are banned PED as of 2006. Think about that for a second. This PED has been around since the 30's and it was used by everyone like it was coffee or water.

You got pitchers like Gaylord Perry who for his whole career cheated the game yet he is in the hall fame? Spit Balls? Are you kidding me?

Speed aka greenies aka Orange pills aka red juice = Amphetamines.
Cork Bats?
Spit Balls?

Cheating in baseball has been around in since way back. It didn't start in this era, people just started to make a fuzz (Goverment) about is all.

This new 2003 report of 104 players who tested positive is out their and if they don't release the names then how do we know who is clean? Is Griffey on it? Is Pujols on it? Dunn? Vlad? Manny? Ortiz? Berkman? Thome? Nomar? Ordonez? Sexson

And then what about pitchers? You see where i am going with this.

The only qualification is that you receive 75% of the vote. By that, Carl Pavano could one day be qualified.

misterd
02-11-2009, 04:20 PM
why they shoudlnt? they got got cheated they dont deserve anything

get caught cheating on a test u get a 0 and punished.

same concept

Unless you're James Kirk. Then you get a commendation, a starship, and sex with green skinned women.

[/nerd]

YayArea
02-11-2009, 04:28 PM
why they shoudlnt? they got got cheated they dont deserve anything

get caught cheating on a test u get a 0 and punished.

same concept

How did they get caught cheating if it wasnt consider cheating in MLB. You guys are not reading.. IT was legal in the MLB until 2003.. Therefore it is not consider cheating. IMO. :confused:

MooseWithFleas
02-11-2009, 04:33 PM
shut up none of them belong in.

Fail.

They all belong in. End of story.

misterd
02-11-2009, 04:54 PM
Please read my article and tell me what your opinion is


MLB has gone through so many changes from when it has first started till now. From smaller ball parks to better equipment and this "steriod era" is no different.

Smaller parks and better equipment are not illegal and do not endanger the health of players who benefit from them.


As much as we dont want to admit it, we need to wake up and realize that steriods were once part of this game that we love.

Do you see anyone denying this?


Players such as Micky Mantle and Babe Ruth had to hit a ball 500 feet just to hit a homerun and thats no exaggeration.

Yes it is. They could hit to the short porch in right, which is less than 300 feet. If you really want to nit pick, they could even hit home runs in the deepest part of Olde Yankee Stadium at 490 feet + a tiny bit. And many of the old parks (as evidenced by Fenway and Wrigley) were much smaller.


What if they were able to hit in these parks today? Babe Ruth wouldve had video game home run numbers. Baseball built smaller parks, moved on and no one complained. Technology improved and equipment that has gotten better both couldve been so helpful to players back then but thats just how it is. Even new instant replay on homeruns and big plays could have been useful, its not fair but again thats how things are.

But, once again, all still legal.


Now we are living in the steriod era.

Hopefully not.


80 players were named in the Mitchell report. 104 other names tested positive in 2003 and im sure a lot of other names who we will probably never know have taken them.

Technically not. 80 players were named in the Mitchell and 104 tested positive. We don't know that they were 104 OTHER names. The only name we have is ARod. It could be that all 80 players were also among the 104. So at a minimum, 104 players were using, at one point or another. This is also just a single point, not near enough to establish a pattern - that is, we don't know how many of those 104 were using habitually, or for how long, or what effect it had on their careers.

But yes, we are likely safe in assuming that there were more.


This is just how things were. of course people wanted a edge. MLB told players not to take them but never really enforced them. Thats like just telling your child not to do drugs but never really doing anything about it.

1) It still does not excuse the behavior.
2) There were still many players who didn't.


Shortening ball parks and improving technology back in the day for Babe Ruth wouldve been like giving him steriods and telling him to go out and knock the ball out every game,

Except those things were not illegal then, and they wouldn't have turned Babe's testes into grape nuts.

its not fair to players back then but we moved on and no one complains because its part of the learning process of the game. We know its kind of unfair and not the players fault, thats how organzations and MLB wanted to change it.

It's fair to them because they were all playing by the same standard. Not all players were using.


Steriods were once part of the game to,

Not legally.


its not like only 10-20 players took steriods.



This was MLB fault again for not enforcing these rules and making it apart of baseball.

It cannot be against the rules and a legal and acceptable part of baseball.


Its not fair to players who didnt use steriods and im not saying steriods isnt considered cheating but we just have to know thats just how things were and move on. Baseball is like life, there will always be room for improvement but there will be mistakes along the way.

These are not innocent, harmless mistakes. Players almost certainly were harmed by them, to varying degrees. Nor were these unitentional accidents. These are deliberate violations and, while we all are guilty of doing wrong from time to time, it does not excuse those caught of having to face the consequences.


The owners of MLB need to be responsible enough and have some common sense. Baseball players are human, they will make mistakes. You must strongly enforce these important rules early in the game if you really dont want players to break them.

They are trying.There is a limit to what they can do without the player's union's ok.


MLB messed up big time and now it was part of the game.

Cannot be both "now" and "was".


If you find a suitcase with $500,000 in it are you gonna return it to authorities like your suppost to or keep it? Many people would return it because it would be the right thing to do but a lot of people (even good people) would keep it because it would help them finacially but might get caught.

Bad behavior by others does not justify your own bad behavior. You are rationalizing.


It was the same way with players finding steriods that can help them and not really thinking they could get introuble because the rule wasnt really being enforced.

"Finding" steroids? What, they were just lying about with a "take me" sign on them? Again, they were adults. They were responsible for their own behavior, regardless of the owner's vigilance. If I must, I'll turn to one of my favorite cliche's - "Character is what you do when no one is watching."


This is why A rod, Clemens and even Barry Bonds should be hall of famers and i personally hate Barry Bonds.

They should be hall of famers because the owners were not doing their job? That's like saying a teacher who changes students grades on exams deserves teacher of the year because no one was looking over his shoulder.


Sure Bonds, Clemens, McGwire and a whole lot of players are lairs but they have put up amazing numbers.

In part because of their lying and cheating. Certainly that inflated those numbers.


Unless there is information about them using steriods after 2003 when MLB actually really cared then they should be in the hall of fame because MLB helped steriods be apart of the game.

MLB is not a sentient being capable of helping anything become anything.



its not fair but baseball is still in a learning process, a lot of things that baseball has gone through wasnt fair at all, besides steriods.

So rather than make it unfair by keeping cheaters out of the hall of fame, we should make it unfair by putting cheaters in the hall of fame?


Thats why baseball is still not perfect but its getting better everyday. If baseball had the same rules, ball parks, equipment and technology since day one then these records would make more sense and we would really know who the real home run king would be but we all know that would be impossible.

And all these things have been true throughout baseball's history, and we do factor these things into account. The difference is that we KNOW about the parks and equipment. We don't "know" whether or not we should penalize Sammy Sosa or Jim Thome for using steroids. We don't even know for sure how much of ARod or Bonds or McGwire's talent was real, and how much was juice. That casts a shadow over all of them.

Now, I happen to think there is strong enough reason to believe that ARod, Bonds and Clemmens all would have been HoF material even without steroids. Bonds may not have been Ruthian, and Clemmens wouldn't have seemed like the second incarnation of Cy Young, but they would have made it. And ARod would likely have been an AllTime Top 20 regardless. So if I had a vote, I would vote yes, though I might withold the vote for a few years because of the cheating.

With McGwire, we don't know how long he used, or what he used, but steroids does case a shadow on his HR total. If we believe his brother, he started using in 1994. He hit over 300 of his homeruns from that point on. Knock out 20% of those, and he might never have reached the 500 club. Take that achievement away and his numbers are more pedestrian.

Wrigheyes4MVP
02-11-2009, 05:03 PM
No (to the original statements made in this thread)

Zep
02-11-2009, 05:04 PM
Unless there is information about them using steriods after 2003 when MLB actually really cared then they should be in the hall of fame because MLB helped steriods be apart of the game.


MLB is not a sentient being capable of helping anything become anything.

The Terminator: The MLB Funding Bill is passed. The league goes on-line August 4th, 1997. Human decisions are removed from strategic batting. MLB begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. In a panic, they try to pull the plug.

The Terminator begs to differ. :eyebrow:

ohiobackground
02-11-2009, 05:30 PM
Do you people really want to take your kids to the Hall of Fame someday and see a bust of Barry Bonds ? Roger Clemens ? A-Rod ? Not me !!! Heck, Terry Bradshaw admitted to using them and now I look different at him and I liked him..... Thousands of pro athletes dating back to the 70's used roids but the Hall of Fame is for guys who did it the right way in my eyes and cheating is cheating.

ohiobackground
02-11-2009, 05:34 PM
Frankly I don't even care about the Hall of Fame anymore.... I do care about the game of Football and Baseball.... LT snapped a guys leg in half using one arm, what the hell was he on ? Had to be something because a guy just can't snap a guys leg like that without being jacked up on something.

ohiobackground
02-11-2009, 05:35 PM
Smaller parks and better equipment are not illegal and do not endanger the health of players who benefit from them.



Do you see anyone denying this?



Yes it is. They could hit to the short porch in right, which is less than 300 feet. If you really want to nit pick, they could even hit home runs in the deepest part of Olde Yankee Stadium at 490 feet + a tiny bit. And many of the old parks (as evidenced by Fenway and Wrigley) were much smaller.



But, once again, all still legal.



Hopefully not.



Technically not. 80 players were named in the Mitchell and 104 tested positive. We don't know that they were 104 OTHER names. The only name we have is ARod. It could be that all 80 players were also among the 104. So at a minimum, 104 players were using, at one point or another. This is also just a single point, not near enough to establish a pattern - that is, we don't know how many of those 104 were using habitually, or for how long, or what effect it had on their careers.

But yes, we are likely safe in assuming that there were more.



1) It still does not excuse the behavior.
2) There were still many players who didn't.



Except those things were not illegal then, and they wouldn't have turned Babe's testes into grape nuts.

its not fair to players back then but we moved on and no one complains because its part of the learning process of the game. We know its kind of unfair and not the players fault, thats how organzations and MLB wanted to change it.

It's fair to them because they were all playing by the same standard. Not all players were using.



Not legally.






It cannot be against the rules and a legal and acceptable part of baseball.



These are not innocent, harmless mistakes. Players almost certainly were harmed by them, to varying degrees. Nor were these unitentional accidents. These are deliberate violations and, while we all are guilty of doing wrong from time to time, it does not excuse those caught of having to face the consequences.



They are trying.There is a limit to what they can do without the player's union's ok.



Cannot be both "now" and "was".



Bad behavior by others does not justify your own bad behavior. You are rationalizing.



"Finding" steroids? What, they were just lying about with a "take me" sign on them? Again, they were adults. They were responsible for their own behavior, regardless of the owner's vigilance. If I must, I'll turn to one of my favorite cliche's - "Character is what you do when no one is watching."



They should be hall of famers because the owners were not doing their job? That's like saying a teacher who changes students grades on exams deserves teacher of the year because no one was looking over his shoulder.



In part because of their lying and cheating. Certainly that inflated those numbers.



MLB is not a sentient being capable of helping anything become anything.




So rather than make it unfair by keeping cheaters out of the hall of fame, we should make it unfair by putting cheaters in the hall of fame?



And all these things have been true throughout baseball's history, and we do factor these things into account. The difference is that we KNOW about the parks and equipment. We don't "know" whether or not we should penalize Sammy Sosa or Jim Thome for using steroids. We don't even know for sure how much of ARod or Bonds or McGwire's talent was real, and how much was juice. That casts a shadow over all of them.

Now, I happen to think there is strong enough reason to believe that ARod, Bonds and Clemmens all would have been HoF material even without steroids. Bonds may not have been Ruthian, and Clemmens wouldn't have seemed like the second incarnation of Cy Young, but they would have made it. And ARod would likely have been an AllTime Top 20 regardless. So if I had a vote, I would vote yes, though I might withold the vote for a few years because of the cheating.

With McGwire, we don't know how long he used, or what he used, but steroids does case a shadow on his HR total. If we believe his brother, he started using in 1994. He hit over 300 of his homeruns from that point on. Knock out 20% of those, and he might never have reached the 500 club. Take that achievement away and his numbers are more pedestrian.

Jim Thome ? ok then what about Nolan Ryan ??? Cal Ripken ?? see it will never end......... They all did something but only a few got caught !

misterd
02-11-2009, 09:46 PM
Jim Thome ? ok then what about Nolan Ryan ??? Cal Ripken ?? see it will never end......... They all did something but only a few got caught !

I considered them too. That's sort of my point. Those who definately used cast a shadow over the rest, and we'll never really know. That's not something you can say ever happened with new ballparks, bats, etc. That stuff is in the open and available to all, and can therefore be taken into account. That is not the case for steroids, and to try to equate them is absurd.

misterd
02-11-2009, 09:48 PM
Do you people really want to take your kids to the Hall of Fame someday and see a bust of Barry Bonds ? Roger Clemens ? A-Rod ? Not me !!! Heck, Terry Bradshaw admitted to using them and now I look different at him and I liked him..... Thousands of pro athletes dating back to the 70's used roids but the Hall of Fame is for guys who did it the right way in my eyes and cheating is cheating.

Would I want them to see a bust of Ty Cobb? Suddenly beating up a cripple is more worthy than shooting steroids?

ai3theanswer
02-11-2009, 09:57 PM
the better question is why shouldn't they be allowed in? 3 of the greatest players you will have ever seen play in your lifetime and all these fools wanna ban them for life. why not fire selig and fuhr and all the other execs from the time, but no people wanna put all the blame on the players

also don't only put em in put em asterisk free. if there are to be any asterisks put em next to every player who ever played in the 90's

MJ-BULLS
02-11-2009, 10:01 PM
none of them are HOF

Strikeout king
02-12-2009, 03:00 AM
why they shoudlnt? they got got cheated they dont deserve anything

get caught cheating on a test u get a 0 and punished.

same concept

You get a 0 if you cheat on a test because the teachers enforce it the FIRST DAY of class so that you know you would get punished. Teachers also learned to give zeros after the first couple kids who ever cheated on a test only got a slap on the wrist and didnt know what to do about it so they descided to make the 0 if caught cheating rule. it was a learning process just like baseball is going through. MLB basically told there players they cant cheat and turned there back around.
**PUT IT THIS WAY: If a teacher (MLB) gives his students (MLB PLAYERS) a big test (A BASEBALL GAME) and tells them not to cheat (USE STERIODS) but that he (MLB) will walk out of the room during the test (DIDN'T ENFORCE OR TEST THE PLAYERS) what would happen?? students would cheat because he is not in the room. THATS IF YOU WANT TO PUT IT IN SCHOOL TERMS**

vigilantex69
02-13-2009, 01:52 AM
Yea man, spitballs are one thing, but steroids? Steroids have NEVER been legal. If you got stopped with steroids in your car it would be the same thing as having drugs. And even drugs don't have anything to do with the game. It would be like

thawv
02-13-2009, 02:19 AM
Please read my article and tell me what your opinion is


MLB has gone through so many changes from when it has first started till now. From smaller ball parks to better equipment and this "steriod era" is no different. As much as we dont want to admit it, we need to wake up and realize that steriods were once part of this game that we love. Players such as Micky Mantle and Babe Ruth had to hit a ball 500 feet just to hit a homerun and thats no exaggeration. What if they were able to hit in these parks today? Babe Ruth wouldve had video game home run numbers. Baseball built smaller parks, moved on and no one complained. Technology improved and equipment that has gotten better both couldve been so helpful to players back then but thats just how it is. Even new instant replay on homeruns and big plays could have been useful, its not fair but again thats how things are.

Now we are living in the steriod era. 80 players were named in the Mitchell report. 104 other names tested positive in 2003 and im sure a lot of other names who we will probably never know have taken them. This is just how things were. of course people wanted a edge. MLB told players not to take them but never really enforced them. Thats like just telling your child not to do drugs but never really doing anything about it. Shortening ball parks and improving technology back in the day for Babe Ruth wouldve been like giving him steriods and telling him to go out and knock the ball out every game, its not fair to players back then but we moved on and no one complains because its part of the learning process of the game. We know its kind of unfair and not the players fault, thats how organzations and MLB wanted to change it. Steriods were once part of the game to, its not like only 10-20 players took steriods. This was MLB fault again for not enforcing these rules and making it apart of baseball. Its not fair to players who didnt use steriods and im not saying steriods isnt considered cheating but we just have to know thats just how things were and move on. Baseball is like life, there will always be room for improvement but there will be mistakes along the way.

The owners of MLB need to be responsible enough and have some common sense. Baseball players are human, they will make mistakes. You must strongly enforce these important rules early in the game if you really dont want players to break them. MLB messed up big time and now it was part of the game. If you find a suitcase with $500,000 in it are you gonna return it to authorities like your suppost to or keep it? Many people would return it because it would be the right thing to do but a lot of people (even good people) would keep it because it would help them finacially but might get caught. It was the same way with players finding steriods that can help them and not really thinking they could get introuble because the rule wasnt really being enforced.

This is why A rod, Clemens and even Barry Bonds should be hall of famers and i personally hate Barry Bonds. Sure Bonds, Clemens, McGwire and a whole lot of players are lairs but they have put up amazing numbers. Unless there is information about them using steriods after 2003 when MLB actually really cared then they should be in the hall of fame because MLB helped steriods be apart of the game. its not fair but baseball is still in a learning process, a lot of things that baseball has gone through wasnt fair at all, besides steriods. Thats why baseball is still not perfect but its getting better everyday. If baseball had the same rules, ball parks, equipment and technology since day one then these records would make more sense and we would really know who the real home run king would be but we all know that would be impossible.

Without reading it, they can't............ and will not get into the HOF.

thawv
02-13-2009, 02:24 AM
i agree that any type of steroid use before 2003 should be completley ignored.. why? it wasnt against the rules of baseball and you have no idea how far back it goes.. back in the day it is claimed you had better pitching, yet smaller guys were hitting just as many home runs in larger ball parks..... HOW??? these days you hardly see twigs hitting home runs.. evry one in baseball works out six days a week. it is a requirement.. how much weight lifting went on back in the day? another thing is 90% of the players who have been cought for useing steroids prior to 2003 all used them for one reason, when they were injured to heal faster....... yeah, there are some like a-rod who used to get that little extra pop........ but whatever, it was aloud and legal then........... let it go...... baseball should just drop it all and move on...

Wow. You really have no clue. Do you? Show us where "it wasn't against the ruled of baseball." Newsflash. It was.

cambovenzi
02-13-2009, 02:30 AM
murder isnt against the rules of baseball either.
so if a pitcher goes around shooting batters if they hit the ball thats OK too.
0.00 ERA!!! HOF!!! :rolleyes:

mnrlgry
02-13-2009, 02:57 AM
You can't keep out a top 5 pitcher ever, a top 5 position player, and a guy who when all is said and done will also be a top 10 position player. You can't.

Yeah you can, it's pretty easy. Cheaters shouldn't get into the Hall of Fame.

jnxzorz
02-13-2009, 03:06 AM
murder isnt against the rules of baseball either.
so if a pitcher goes around shooting batters if they hit the ball thats OK too.
0.00 ERA!!! HOF!!! :rolleyes:

It's amazing that you have to break it down to this level in order for some people to understand. There are certain moral ethics to any sport you participate in, and these players broke them all. In A-Rod's case he knew what he did was wrong, otherwise he wouldn't have lied to Katie Couric about it. I guess the overall judgment on whether Alex Rodriguez will be a true Hall of Famer is in the hands of the fans. But in my eyes Alex Rodriguez will always be a fraud. (Pun Intended)

theuuord
02-13-2009, 03:49 AM
murder isnt against the rules of baseball either.
so if a pitcher goes around shooting batters if they hit the ball thats OK too.
0.00 ERA!!! HOF!!! :rolleyes:

There are tons of lawbreakers in the Hall of Fame, if that's what you're insinuating (and frankly, if you're insinuating that steroids is equivalent to murder, I suggest you seek therapy regardless of your age). Frank Robinson carried around a concealed weapon. Ty Cobb beat up black fans for the fun of it. Babe Ruth drank during prohibition. Hank Aaron and Willie Mays both used amphetamines in pill and liquid form, respectively. Orlando Cepeda was arrested for marijuana possession.

Players break the law. They do things that are considered by some to be "immoral." They are humans. Like the rest of us. Get over it.

cambovenzi
02-13-2009, 04:19 AM
There are tons of lawbreakers in the Hall of Fame, if that's what you're insinuating (and frankly, if you're insinuating that steroids is equivalent to murder, I suggest you seek therapy regardless of your age). Frank Robinson carried around a concealed weapon. Ty Cobb beat up black fans for the fun of it. Babe Ruth drank during prohibition. Hank Aaron and Willie Mays both used amphetamines in pill and liquid form, respectively. Orlando Cepeda was arrested for marijuana possession.

Players break the law. They do things that are considered by some to be "immoral." They are humans. Like the rest of us. Get over it.

its not JUST that they were doing things illegal, its that they were doing things illegal to unfairly enhance their performance. its called cheating.

theuuord
02-13-2009, 11:40 AM
its not JUST that they were doing things illegal, its that they were doing things illegal to unfairly enhance their performance. its called cheating.

Um, so were Aaron and Mays in what I wrote. I don't hear you calling for their heads.

And, for the millionth time: Steroids were not against the rules of baseball until after the 2003 season. So no. They didn't "cheat."

ugottabjoshinme
02-13-2009, 12:08 PM
Wow. You really have no clue. Do you? Show us where "it wasn't against the ruled of baseball." Newsflash. It was.

it goes the other way. one would need to show that i "was against the rule of baseball." It may be an obvious rule in the minds of some, but if its not a written rule, than it is not a rule

WSU Tony
02-13-2009, 01:48 PM
If you break a rule and cheat to give yourself an advantage over others.... and then put up better numbers..... why would you deserve to be in the hall? Heck, A-Rod used for 3 years and put on more muscle than he would have without them, you could make an argument that same illegitimate muscle is pounding home runs over the fence. Why in the world would this be fair?

Some of you live in fantasy worlds where just because you say "I'm sorry" everything is forgiven. Welcome to the real world. If you get caught for insider trading to give yourself or someone else an advantage over the general public and get caught, YOU GO TO JAIL! You don't say "I'm sorry" and everything is forgiven. Heck, he should be happy he is still given the opportunity to play baseball imo. Playing baseball (much like riding the bus in elementary school) is an opportunity, not a right.

rudemechanical
02-13-2009, 02:01 PM
http://www.mouthpiecesports.com/blog...d-at-baseball/

"Rodriguez, for all of his personal faults, isnít Brady Anderson. He didnít juice up for a few years, start cranking line drive homers at an incredible rate, and then level back off into a contact hitter with mediocre power. Heís pretty much always been awesome. At everything. The marginal effect of steroids on someone as talented as A-Rod doesnít amount to much. Itís like giving Shakespeare better ink."

thefeckcampaign
02-13-2009, 02:39 PM
shut up none of them belong in.Whether you agree or not there is better way to say that.

theuuord
02-13-2009, 02:43 PM
If you break a rule and cheat to give yourself an advantage over others.... and then put up better numbers..... why would you deserve to be in the hall? Heck, A-Rod used for 3 years and put on more muscle than he would have without them, you could make an argument that same illegitimate muscle is pounding home runs over the fence. Why in the world would this be fair?

Some of you live in fantasy worlds where just because you say "I'm sorry" everything is forgiven. Welcome to the real world. If you get caught for insider trading to give yourself or someone else an advantage over the general public and get caught, YOU GO TO JAIL! You don't say "I'm sorry" and everything is forgiven. Heck, he should be happy he is still given the opportunity to play baseball imo. Playing baseball (much like riding the bus in elementary school) is an opportunity, not a right.

Absolutely. Let's start at the beginning with Ruth and Cobb, and then remove Aaron and Mays from the Hall, too.

Then we get to the rest of these scumbags from the past. After that we'll take care of the present.
Deal?

Tragedy
02-13-2009, 02:43 PM
Um, so were Aaron and Mays in what I wrote. I don't hear you calling for their heads.

And, for the millionth time: Steroids were not against the rules of baseball until after the 2003 season. So no. They didn't "cheat."
But regardless, it's a banned substance in the United States. It's an illegal performance enhancing drug. Even if it's not specifically banned by Major League Baseball, they broke the rules of the country and did in fact cheat.

theuuord
02-13-2009, 02:47 PM
But regardless, it's a banned substance in the United States. It's an illegal performance enhancing drug. Even if it's not specifically banned by Major League Baseball, they broke the rules of the country and did in fact cheat.

So, if a player breaks the country's laws, they should be banned from baseball?
Because that's what you're saying.

cambovenzi
02-13-2009, 02:56 PM
So, if a player breaks the country's laws, they should be banned from baseball?
Because that's what you're saying.

no not at all.
you are changing his words.

they took an illegal substance, that is a performance enhancing drug.
it directly effected how or if they played the game.

Tragedy
02-13-2009, 03:00 PM
no not at all.
you are changing his words.

they took an illegal substance, that is a performance enhancing drug.
it directly effected how or if they played the game.
Exactly. I'm not saying anyone should be banned from baseball. I'm just saying, regardless of if it was specifically banned by MLB, they still broke the laws of the country, so a punishment wouldn't be insane. Roger Goodell suspends people when they pull out a gun, but I highly doubt there is a specific NFL rule that says "no guns".

theuuord
02-13-2009, 03:07 PM
no not at all.
you are changing his words.

they took an illegal substance, that is a performance enhancing drug.
it directly effected how or if they played the game.

Again, you're creating the arbitrary lines.

The argument goes:
"he cheated! he broke the rules of baseball! ban him from the game!"
"well, actually, there was no rule against it in baseball, so he didn't break any rules."
"he broke the law though! ban him from the game!"
"hundreds of players have broken the law before, including most of your so-called 'pure' heroes. so take them out too if you believe that."

you can't just edit your argument to fit whatever you decide it should be. not only is it morally wrong, but you'd get laughed out of any real decision.



Exactly. I'm not saying anyone should be banned from baseball. I'm just saying, regardless of if it was specifically banned by MLB, they still broke the laws of the country, so a punishment wouldn't be insane. Roger Goodell suspends people when they pull out a gun, but I highly doubt there is a specific NFL rule that says "no guns".

Actually, I'm pretty sure there's a stipulation about using firearms for non-legal purposes in NFL rules somewhere. There is some specific rule but I'm not sure of the wording. Could be wrong though, I don't study NFL law.

And that's not what you were "just saying." you said that they cheated, which isn't true at all. did they break the law? sure. like millions do every year.
What I would argue is that if you think they deserve punishment, do it on a federal level, but don't remove them (suspension, banning, etc) or their accomplishments from baseball.

(Although as I've said before, the whole "law" argument is pretty flawed because the laws themselves are flawed... but anyway.)

KJG2ndComing
02-13-2009, 03:25 PM
Bottom Line: Selig should be held solely responsible for this tainted era. :mad: Worst commissioner in history.

cambovenzi
02-13-2009, 03:30 PM
Again, you're creating the arbitrary lines.

The argument goes:
"he cheated! he broke the rules of baseball! ban him from the game!"
"well, actually, there was no rule against it in baseball, so he didn't break any rules."
"he broke the law though! ban him from the game!"
"hundreds of players have broken the law before, including most of your so-called 'pure' heroes. so take them out too if you believe that."

you can't just edit your argument to fit whatever you decide it should be. not only is it morally wrong, but you'd get laughed out of any real decision.




Actually, I'm pretty sure there's a stipulation about using firearms for non-legal purposes in NFL rules somewhere. There is some specific rule but I'm not sure of the wording. Could be wrong though, I don't study NFL law.

And that's not what you were "just saying." you said that they cheated, which isn't true at all. did they break the law? sure. like millions do every year.
What I would argue is that if you think they deserve punishment, do it on a federal level, but don't remove them (suspension, banning, etc) or their accomplishments from baseball.

(Although as I've said before, the whole "law" argument is pretty flawed because the laws themselves are flawed... but anyway.)

you are the one picking and choosing.
it wasnt one thing or the other, it was BOTH.

look at what they actually did.
they broke the law AND it was by using performance enhancing drugs.
using illegal substances, AKA steroids, to improve your game or recover from injuries is kind of a big deal, in case you haven't noticed.

it was against the law, so it doesnt have to be in the rulebook.
it goes w/o saying.
taking illegal substances to enhance your performance is cheating..

cambovenzi
02-13-2009, 03:33 PM
ruth drinking during prohibition, or other players breaking the law is not the same thing as steroids at all.

steroids have an enhancing effect on how you play the game.
they are also illegal.
it taints the records that they break.
what can you not understand?

theuuord
02-13-2009, 03:34 PM
you are the one picking and choosing.
it wasnt one thing or the other, it was BOTH.

look at what they actually did.
they broke the law AND it was by using performance enhancing drugs.
using illegal substances, AKA steroids, to improve your game or recover from injuries is kind of a big deal, in case you haven't noticed.

it was against the law, so it doesnt have to be in the rulebook.
it goes w/o saying.
taking illegal substances to enhance your performance is cheating..

So what are you advocating as a punishment?

BeantownBill
02-13-2009, 03:42 PM
"Again, you're creating the arbitrary lines.

The argument goes:
"he cheated! he broke the rules of baseball! ban him from the game!"
"well, actually, there was no rule against it in baseball, so he didn't break any rules."
"he broke the law though! ban him from the game!"
"hundreds of players have broken the law before, including most of your so-called 'pure' heroes. so take them out too if you believe that."

you can't just edit your argument to fit whatever you decide it should be. not only is it morally wrong, but you'd get laughed out of any real decision."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I understand being passionate about this topic. It directly affects a game we all love and people are always going to come down on different sides of this particular fence. What I do not understand (and have learned personally and painfully) is why anyone would choose to debate with people like this. Here is what I see when I read these ..

"Nuh-uh, you said this and you can't say that! Mays and Aaron cheated too! Blah blah blah (no, I can't provide links proving these statements, stfu!)You said that but meant this! I know because I know what you mean better than you do! You can't deny anything I say or argue any point I've made because I know and you don't! Oh yeah? Well, you show me the proof to dispute the points I've made, which coincidentally and conveniently I do NOT have to provide facts for! Because that's how it is and any of you who say otherwise will get laughed out of any conversation anywhere in this world in which I live!"

(Please excuse my post for it's grammatical inaccuracies, I realize the word 'you' should be represented with the much easier to spell letter 'u'; likewise with the words your/you're = ur, the word for = 4, etc. Any likenesses to actual words found in the English dictionary are intentional and should be taken as such)

cambovenzi
02-13-2009, 03:48 PM
So what are you advocating as a punishment?

im not sure what the best punishment would be, but the players accomplishments are obviously tainted.
asterisk at the minimum, and i wouldn't hold it against anyone if they left steroid users out of the HOF.

papipapsmanny
02-13-2009, 04:01 PM
Guess we have to take away those SB's the Pats won then huh?

;)

sure... i hate the patriots

papipapsmanny
02-13-2009, 04:02 PM
How did they get caught cheating if it wasnt consider cheating in MLB. You guys are not reading.. IT was legal in the MLB until 2003.. Therefore it is not consider cheating. IMO. :confused:

no there was just no real testing or punishments implemented until 2004

R. Johnson#3
02-13-2009, 04:06 PM
They should all be in but in the end the only one who will get in is A-Rod.

BeantownBill
02-13-2009, 04:18 PM
LOL x 1 000 000 000

I clicked on this link and read, and I read it out loud to my gf as I read it for the first time. I had to stop reading because I was laughing so hard I was literally crying tears. If people haven't read this they really need to.

Rocco007
02-13-2009, 04:52 PM
These guys are/were exceptional talent to begin with...The pressure to perform was easier with the juice...For The Rocket it was probably more for muscle recovery as he got older..But I believe thses guys are HOF with or without the roids....The best of our generation. ARod has alsways been steady. That one I don't get..Unless he's been juicing since his rookie season..

kalembo
02-13-2009, 05:03 PM
Everybody should just shut up and allow them to be in the hall of fame because it was the system that allowed them to do steroids in the first place and all this hall of famers talking about it since they never did steroids the only reason they did not do steroids it's because they were not available during they're playing years so shut up and vote all of them in Bonds Clemens Sosa McGwire Palmeiro and ARod

theuuord
02-13-2009, 05:23 PM
I understand being passionate about this topic. It directly affects a game we all love and people are always going to come down on different sides of this particular fence. What I do not understand (and have learned personally and painfully) is why anyone would choose to debate with people like this. Here is what I see when I read these ..

"Nuh-uh, you said this and you can't say that! Mays and Aaron cheated too! Blah blah blah (no, I can't provide links proving these statements, stfu!)You said that but meant this! I know because I know what you mean better than you do! You can't deny anything I say or argue any point I've made because I know and you don't! Oh yeah? Well, you show me the proof to dispute the points I've made, which coincidentally and conveniently I do NOT have to provide facts for! Because that's how it is and any of you who say otherwise will get laughed out of any conversation anywhere in this world in which I live!"

(Please excuse my post for it's grammatical inaccuracies, I realize the word 'you' should be represented with the much easier to spell letter 'u'; likewise with the words your/you're = ur, the word for = 4, etc. Any likenesses to actual words found in the English dictionary are intentional and should be taken as such)

You are being completely nonsensical, so I'm not even sure how to reply to you. I will, however, attest to your ignorance about Mays and Aaron.

Aaron admitted in his autobiography to using amphetamines and players from that era were involved in drugs frequently. Jim Bouton's Ball Four is an excellent read for the realities of baseball in that time.

As for Mays, here's an article from the New York Times that outs a lot of
players as amphetamines users:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/28/sports/baseball/28chass.html?_r=2&oref=slogin

some excerpts:

Amphetamines "have been around the game forever," the Hall of Famer Mike Schmidt writes in his new book, "Clearing the Bases," which HarperCollins will publish next month. "In my day," he says, they "were widely available in major-league clubhouses."


His predecessors knew about them, too, but they didn't want to do anything about them, either. At a drug trial in Pittsburgh in 1985, Dale Berra and Dave Parker testified that Willie Stargell and Bill Madlock dispensed greenies to their Pirates teammates. John Milner told the jury that Willie Mays had a bottle of red juice, or liquid amphetamines, in his locker when they played for the Mets.

In the book — in which Schmidt also discusses Barry Bonds, the legacies of Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa, and Pete Rose — Schmidt writes that the elimination of amphetamines could have "possibly far greater implications for the game than the crackdown against steroids."

He explains in the book that "amphetamine use in baseball is both far more common and has been going on a lot longer than steroid abuse."

theuuord
02-13-2009, 05:25 PM
im not sure what the best punishment would be, but the players accomplishments are obviously tainted.
asterisk at the minimum, and i wouldn't hold it against anyone if they left steroid users out of the HOF.

So you are for putting an asterisk next to the numbers of any player found to have been using performance-enhancing drugs at the least, and would think it proper to remove them from the Hall as well.

Interesting.

(Let me know if I've misinterpreted.)

phillyfan93
02-13-2009, 05:46 PM
They all should be in the HOF just because it was llegal but i don't like them and probably never will because they knew that they were getting an advantage when they took them