Return to Baseball Leftovers

Haters beware

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Postby Art Vandelay » Thu Apr 05, 2007 8:54 pm

OREO fan wrote:
Art Vandelay wrote:
OREO fan wrote:I honestly don't remember the country's reaction to Bonds breaking McGwire's record in 2001. Was it predominantly positive or negative?

Negative. The same way that the reaction to everything Bonds has done is negative. People don't care that a record is broken, they care that a record is being broken by Barry Bonds.


Was it negative due to steroid/drug implications or simply because people don't like Bonds?


A combination of the two, obviously. People have been disliking Barry Bonds since way before he was linked to steroids...how do you think Terry Pendleton and Jeff Kent "earned" MVP trophies.
Image
Art Vandelay
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

CafeholicFantasy ExpertPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 5254
(Past Year: -11)
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby jnormy » Fri Apr 06, 2007 12:50 am

wrveres wrote:If used properly, I don't think steroids are dangerous at all. Its when you start abusing them, like with any other drug, that they become dangerous.
Once this trumped up media scare dies down, and you all put away your pitchforks and hanging nooses, it is my guess that within the next 10 years you will be able to get your steroids and HGH supplements right next to the Slim Jims at your local 7-11.


LOL... I'm sorry, but you crack me up, the way you keep dancing around the issues . As soon as it came to light that McGuire and Sosa actually used steroids, a whole lot of people were hating on them bigtime. Did you completely miss how the Hall of Fame vote went for Big Mac?

You stated a few pages ago that people had no credibility re. the steroids issue today because they cheered on Mac and Sosa in '98. A number of people have told you quite correctly how wrong you were in that assertion, and you just keep pirouetting around it.

This has been an entertaining read for sure. :-D
jnormy
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

User avatar

Posts: 1324
(Past Year: 31)
Joined: 16 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby jnormy » Fri Apr 06, 2007 12:55 am

bigh0rt wrote:What do you guys think about him wearing number 42?


That's cool, I think a lot of the players are going to end up joining Griffey that day. Nice idea to honor a great baseball player and man. ;-D
jnormy
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

User avatar

Posts: 1324
(Past Year: 31)
Joined: 16 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby The Loveable Losers » Sat Apr 07, 2007 11:10 am

TheRock wrote:
wrveres wrote:
TheRock wrote:
wrveres wrote:
TheRock wrote:
wrveres wrote:Anabolic steroids have been associated with potentially fatal side effects, including heart attacks, cancers, liver dysfunction, and severe disorders of mood and mental function.


And here's the heart of the issue. Steroids are dangerous and therefore can't be lumped together with pine tar as "just another way those silly ball players try to cheat". Can't believe the number of people flippantly defending the poster boy for steroids himself. How many young athletes will suffer injuries or die trying to be like this ape of a man you can't stop praising?



an ape huh,, good stuff.
what about the children ... classic.

Hey, maybe you can show me a link to the bodies. I hate to sound morbid, but I have searched for years and cannot find all these bodies located in the morgues do to steroid use. There just isn't any.


Perhaps you should read the bolded section above. FROM YOUR OWN POST. Sorry, didn't know it would be so hard for you to find.


So you are saying you don't have a link.
But yet you are convinced that kids are just kicking it left and right trying to be like "Ape Man" .. (good choice of words by the way).
I am not buying it. A link with some actual percentages of toe tags might sway me though.


Wow, now you're actually arguing that steroids aren't dangerous, despite what I pulled from what YOU posted earlier. Pretty common knowledge, actually. I'm just going to call you "head-in-the-sand wrveres".


You guys are arguing completely different issues. wrveres is arguing that the entire 'think of the children' argument is phony because kids simply aren't running to the pharmacy in droves to pick up anabolic steroids. If you want to shoot down his argument then you need to aim there, not at a medical argument about the effects of steroid abuse (which I think that we'll all grant is a generally bad idea when it comes to long-term health).

Honestly, the best thing Barry Bonds can do for the kids is to abuse steroids openly and to advocate giving the stuff to your kids starting at age 2. He's so hated and vilified that his endorsement of steroid abuse would practically guarantee that no kid will ever touch the stuff. ;-D
Hope springs eternal
grows like ivy on the vine
then dies in the fall

--Haiku for a Cubs Fan, The Loveable Losers
The Loveable Losers
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterWeb Supporter
Posts: 7525
(Past Year: 235)
Joined: 30 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Cubs Win!!! Cubs Win!!!

Postby frankadelic » Sat Apr 07, 2007 11:58 am

One of the best articles on steroids in sports I've ever read:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/st ... ortCat=nfl
frankadelic
Softball Supervisor
Softball Supervisor


Posts: 53
Joined: 2 Jun 2006
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby The Loveable Losers » Sat Apr 07, 2007 12:17 pm

frankadelic wrote:One of the best articles on steroids in sports I've ever read:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/st ... ortCat=nfl


I agree...very good article that's not preachy like so many articles on steroids in sports tend to be. I found this section particularly interesting (emphasis is mine):

This will not be simple. I don't think there will be a fall guy for the NFL; over time, we won't be able to separate Merriman from the rest of the puzzle (which MLB has so far successfully done with Bonds). It won't be about the legitimacy of specific players. This will be more of an across-the-board dilemma, because we will have to publicly acknowledge that the most popular sport in the country has been kinetically altered by drugs, probably for the past 25 years. In many ways, the NFL's reaction barely matters. What matters more is how fans will attempt to reconcile that realization with their personal feelings toward the game. The question, ultimately, is this: If it turns out the lifeblood of the NFL is unnatural, does that make the game less meaningful?


I think that section there pretty much boils down where I differ from a lot of people on Bonds. Unlike many people I've always taken the same approach to looking at MLB as the writer says that most people take to the NFL. It's not about the legitimacy of specific players. That's because I'm assuming that there were a TON of people doing this. Especially before it was specifically banned but even afterwards to a smaller extent. There is simply too much money, pride and personal drive involved with any professional sport for players to ignore something that could give them an edge. Unless a player is cheating in a way that other players can't cheat (help from Martians or what have you) I tend to look at it as a systemic and not an individual problem. You fix the system and move on...you don't crucify the players in the process.
Hope springs eternal
grows like ivy on the vine
then dies in the fall

--Haiku for a Cubs Fan, The Loveable Losers
The Loveable Losers
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterWeb Supporter
Posts: 7525
(Past Year: 235)
Joined: 30 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Cubs Win!!! Cubs Win!!!

Postby mbuser » Sat Apr 07, 2007 1:33 pm

The Loveable Losers wrote:
This will not be simple. I don't think there will be a fall guy for the NFL; over time, we won't be able to separate Merriman from the rest of the puzzle (which MLB has so far successfully done with Bonds). It won't be about the legitimacy of specific players. This will be more of an across-the-board dilemma, because we will have to publicly acknowledge that the most popular sport in the country has been kinetically altered by drugs, probably for the past 25 years. In many ways, the NFL's reaction barely matters. What matters more is how fans will attempt to reconcile that realization with their personal feelings toward the game. The question, ultimately, is this: If it turns out the lifeblood of the NFL is unnatural, does that make the game less meaningful?


I think that section there pretty much boils down where I differ from a lot of people on Bonds. Unlike many people I've always taken the same approach to looking at MLB as the writer says that most people take to the NFL. It's not about the legitimacy of specific players. That's because I'm assuming that there were a TON of people doing this. Especially before it was specifically banned but even afterwards to a smaller extent. There is simply too much money, pride and personal drive involved with any professional sport for players to ignore something that could give them an edge. Unless a player is cheating in a way that other players can't cheat (help from Martians or what have you) I tend to look at it as a systemic and not an individual problem. You fix the system and move on...you don't crucify the players in the process.


i think the difference is that merriman as a player isn't on par with bonds -- and yes i'm saying this despite his 17 sacks last season. if ladainian tomlinson tested positive for steroids, the public sentiment would be much different from merriman's. if peytom manning or tom brady tested positive for HGH, there would be significant fallout. i'll again make the point that i can't believe isn't already redundant ... bonds is treated differently because he is on a short list of the greatest baseball players of all time and is close to breaking what many consider the greatest record in professional sports. i remember when game of shadows was about to come out and someone who thought it was unfair to single bonds out said 'well why isn't there a book about alex sanchez?' i hope you would agree with my feeling that it was as ludicrous of a question as could be asked
mbuser
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

User avatar
Cafeholic
Posts: 1249
(Past Year: 73)
Joined: 21 Feb 2004
Home Cafe: Basketball

Postby The Loveable Losers » Sat Apr 07, 2007 2:01 pm

mbuser wrote:
The Loveable Losers wrote:
This will not be simple. I don't think there will be a fall guy for the NFL; over time, we won't be able to separate Merriman from the rest of the puzzle (which MLB has so far successfully done with Bonds). It won't be about the legitimacy of specific players. This will be more of an across-the-board dilemma, because we will have to publicly acknowledge that the most popular sport in the country has been kinetically altered by drugs, probably for the past 25 years. In many ways, the NFL's reaction barely matters. What matters more is how fans will attempt to reconcile that realization with their personal feelings toward the game. The question, ultimately, is this: If it turns out the lifeblood of the NFL is unnatural, does that make the game less meaningful?


I think that section there pretty much boils down where I differ from a lot of people on Bonds. Unlike many people I've always taken the same approach to looking at MLB as the writer says that most people take to the NFL. It's not about the legitimacy of specific players. That's because I'm assuming that there were a TON of people doing this. Especially before it was specifically banned but even afterwards to a smaller extent. There is simply too much money, pride and personal drive involved with any professional sport for players to ignore something that could give them an edge. Unless a player is cheating in a way that other players can't cheat (help from Martians or what have you) I tend to look at it as a systemic and not an individual problem. You fix the system and move on...you don't crucify the players in the process.


i think the difference is that merriman as a player isn't on par with bonds -- and yes i'm saying this despite his 17 sacks last season. if ladainian tomlinson tested positive for steroids, the public sentiment would be much different from merriman's. if peytom manning or tom brady tested positive for HGH, there would be significant fallout. i'll again make the point that i can't believe isn't already redundant ... bonds is treated differently because he is on a short list of the greatest baseball players of all time and is close to breaking what many consider the greatest record in professional sports. i remember when game of shadows was about to come out and someone who thought it was unfair to single bonds out said 'well why isn't there a book about alex sanchez?' i hope you would agree with my feeling that it was as ludicrous of a question as could be asked


I absolutely agree with the level of attention being different. I question the level of acrimony more than the level of attention. Even so, for me it's not about individual players. My assumption is that this is a systemic problem and I'm not going to fault individual players for faults within the system. I realize some people out there have legitimate opinions that differ with mine on this issue. But even given those legitimate opinions the vitriolic hatred towards Bonds displayed by some people still gives me pause...can it just be the records and the notoriety that cause this hatred? I think it has to be more than that for some people...you don't see people talking about how they just wish McGwire would disappear forever off the face of the earth never to be heard from again. Even now the primary desire I've heard from the McGwire detractors is for him to come forward and own up to his mistakes because, as we all know, it's 'for the children'. With Bonds you don't hear people wish he would talk...you hear people wish he would shut up or just disappear.
Hope springs eternal
grows like ivy on the vine
then dies in the fall

--Haiku for a Cubs Fan, The Loveable Losers
The Loveable Losers
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterWeb Supporter
Posts: 7525
(Past Year: 235)
Joined: 30 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Cubs Win!!! Cubs Win!!!

Postby Coppermine » Sat Apr 07, 2007 2:16 pm

Hey guys, what did I miss :-b
If you're a battery, you're either working or you're dead....
Coppermine
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar

Posts: 8793
(Past Year: -47)
Joined: 6 Sep 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Pennsyltucky

Postby wrveres » Sat Apr 07, 2007 3:30 pm

mbuser wrote:
The Loveable Losers wrote:
This will not be simple. I don't think there will be a fall guy for the NFL; over time, we won't be able to separate Merriman from the rest of the puzzle (which MLB has so far successfully done with Bonds). It won't be about the legitimacy of specific players. This will be more of an across-the-board dilemma, because we will have to publicly acknowledge that the most popular sport in the country has been kinetically altered by drugs, probably for the past 25 years. In many ways, the NFL's reaction barely matters. What matters more is how fans will attempt to reconcile that realization with their personal feelings toward the game. The question, ultimately, is this: If it turns out the lifeblood of the NFL is unnatural, does that make the game less meaningful?


I think that section there pretty much boils down where I differ from a lot of people on Bonds. Unlike many people I've always taken the same approach to looking at MLB as the writer says that most people take to the NFL. It's not about the legitimacy of specific players. That's because I'm assuming that there were a TON of people doing this. Especially before it was specifically banned but even afterwards to a smaller extent. There is simply too much money, pride and personal drive involved with any professional sport for players to ignore something that could give them an edge. Unless a player is cheating in a way that other players can't cheat (help from Martians or what have you) I tend to look at it as a systemic and not an individual problem. You fix the system and move on...you don't crucify the players in the process.


i think the difference is that merriman as a player isn't on par with bonds -- and yes i'm saying this despite his 17 sacks last season. if ladainian tomlinson tested positive for steroids, the public sentiment would be much different from merriman's. if peytom manning or tom brady tested positive for HGH, there would be significant fallout. i'll again make the point that i can't believe isn't already redundant ... bonds is treated differently because he is on a short list of the greatest baseball players of all time and is close to breaking what many consider the greatest record in professional sports. i remember when game of shadows was about to come out and someone who thought it was unfair to single bonds out said 'well why isn't there a book about alex sanchez?' i hope you would agree with my feeling that it was as ludicrous of a question as could be asked


Yes but on that same note, Alex Sanchez has been blackballed from MLB.
His crime?
being the first player caught using steroids.

where as with Merrimen, everybody was ready to overlook his positive test the next morning, and just simply move on.
Last edited by wrveres on Sat Apr 07, 2007 4:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
wrveres
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterEagle EyeInnovative MemberCafe Musketeer
Posts: 31204
(Past Year: -313)
Joined: 2 Mar 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball

PreviousNext

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron