MLB 2025 Season

Cliffy6745 · March 2012

RW81233 wrote:

Cliffy6745 wrote:

I didn't give a shit about steroids when baseball allowed it. You would have been an idiot not to take them and I don't blame one of them. That said, now that they are testing I don't think they should be part of the game and find it amusing when people get caught.

i gotcha on the amusement...just because my politics with regard to steroids are indifferent would lead me to not care about the yanks or sawx that used didn't preclude me from making fun of my friends team's. that said, the pierce article is spot on - drug testing in sports is a deeply flawed system that is making a ton of people a ton of money at the expense of the dignity of athletes and it's going to take a lot to reverse the idiocy. hell howard bryant made a killing off of writing about steroids in a sports book, espn gets more shit to sift through their 24 hour news cycle, the drug testers get paid, the league's "seem" better to the public so it's good PR, and the whole thing is fucking stupid. the only logical conclusion to PED testing is to make everyone eat the same thing, work out the same amount, and so on, which is just stupid. on top of that isn't it funny that we celebrate the removal of tendons from a cadaver allowing an athlete who had 0 chance of playing in a game to play not once but twice with a bloody sock, yet we bemoan the idea that barry bonds didn't deserve his home runs because he rubbed a little cream on his body.

There is no doubt that testing is sports is flawed. The percepetion of steroids is sports is bizarre. I would guess that 90% of Americans think baseball has a bigger steroid problem than football based on the PR over the past 10 years. I haven't had a chance to read that whole article but plan to and I don't disagree that a lot of people are making money on it and that's clearly not good.

I just don't agree that it should be allowed, which I believe was part of the point of the article. If that is the case, when is it acceptable for athletes to begin taking steroids and the risks involved? When they turn pro? That doesn't work because everyone younger will take them to get a bigger contract. I just don't think you can allow something like that in pro sports when it will have such a big impact on amateur sports.

Wobbie · March 2012

RW81233 wrote:

there is no logic and reason when it comes to cleanliness...that's why i posted the article Pierce is the first dude in the media who actually gets the illogic of steroids hate.

there's actually a Yale and Harvard educated doctor and professor at the U. of Wisc who wrote a landmark article in 1983 called "Let 'em Take Steroids" for the NY Times....guys name is Norman Fost....I wish I could find a link to the article but can't....it made soooooo much sense. Anyway, if you're interested, google "norman fost steroids"

here's an excerpt I liked from another article (sorry about the yankees reference

):

1. Steroids result in unfair competition.
Anabolic steroids clearly do enhance performance for many athletes, but there is no coherent argument to support the view that enhancing performance is unfair. If it were, we should ban coaching and training. Competition can be unfair if there is unequal access to such enhancements, but equal access can be achieved more predictably by deregulation than by prohibition. It is hypocritical for leaders in major league baseball to trumpet their concern about fair competition in a league that allows one team (the Yankees) to have a payroll 3 times larger than most of its competitors.

A particularly egregious example of this hypocrisy was the juxtaposition in the 1988 Olympics of Ben Johnson and Janet Evans. Johnson broke the world record for the 100-meter dash and not only had his gold medal taken away but became the permanent poster child for the immorality of steroids, which, though illegal, were available to virtually anyone who wanted them. Evans, after winning her medal in swimming, bragged about the key role of her greasy swimsuit, which the Americans had kept secret from their competitors, and went on a prolonged lecture tour as "America's Sweetheart."

polaris_x · March 2012

if peds are proven to not have any ill side effects related to one's health long or short term ... i would be open to them being allowed ... if they aren't ... they should be banned ...

The Juggler · March 2012

Jearlpam0925 wrote:

On an unrelated note - MLB Net is easily better than the NFL Network now. And dare I say, MLB Productions has surpassed NFL Films. Highly underrated stuff they do.

i agree on the networks but mlb productions, while underrated, is still not up to par with nfl films

those "football life" docs last fall are all you need to watch to know that. i'm biased of course, but the jerome brown/reggie white one brought a tear to my eye. those shows were so well done.

Monster Rain · March 2012

Jearlpam0925 wrote:

Everything fun about last season wouldn't exist? That was the first time in forever that anything of that nature has happened on the last day of the season. If anything, that emphasized MLB to expand the playoffs. Now they're guaranteeing at least two of those games every year.

The Phils.

Right, but what fun is there in a 1-game playoff when it's between a 94-win team and an 85-win team? It's forced, manufactured drama. There won't always be 2 teams that close in the standings playing each other in that playoff game. These extra games won't be as memorable as last year's final day, the '78 Yankees/Sox playoff, the '51 Giants/Dodgers playoff, or any other game like that but Selig wants us to think that they will be every bit as memorable, if not more. They're selling it as great for the fans, but I don't recall ever hearing any fans begging for this type of format before MLB and the union started discussing it.

If Bud Selig really wanted to make the division titles mean something more than they do now he would have asked the union to agree to revert back to 2 divisions and had 2 Wild Card teams play the 2 division winners or just had 2 divisions and go back to having just the LCS and World Series. You want drama? Picture NY, Boston, and Tampa Bay fighting for 1 playoff spot or St. Louis, Philadelphia, Milwaukee, and Atlanta fighting for the divison title. I don't doubt that Selig believes the extra playoff game is good for the game, but I think he's wrong about it and I think it would never have happened if there wasn't money to be made from it. This is the same guy who thinks having the All-Star Game decide home-field advantage in the World Series is a great idea, after all.

I could argue that you only like this because it helps the Phillies the same way you think I hate it because I'm a Yankees fan. Last year they wouldn't have face Carpenter twice and this year they are a safe bet at a playoff spot even if one of the other NL East teams has improved enough to overtake them in the standings since Howard's hurt, Oswalt's gone, and DC and Miami both made some serious improvements this winter.

Wobbie · March 2012

polaris_x wrote:

if peds are proven to not have any ill side effects related to one's health long or short term ... i would be open to them being allowed ... if they aren't ... they should be banned ...

3. Steroids cause life-threatening harms.
Good ethics starts with good facts, and the claims on this point are, to understate the case, seriously overstated. Articles abound in the mass media on the life-threatening risks of anabolic steroids: cancer, heart disease, stroke, and so on. What is missing are peer-reviewed articles in scientific journals to support the claims. Quick: name an athlete who died, or was diagnosed, with steroid-related cancer, heart disease, or stroke. Cases are so hard to find that the prohibitionists have to make them up. So Lyle Alzado, the NFL all-star, is presented on the front page of the New York Times and the cover of Sports Illustrated because of an alleged steroid-related brain tumor. What is missing is a single article, or evidence, or even a quote from any authority on the topic to support any connection between steroids and Alzado's tumor.

and that was written about anabolic steroids....to my knowledge, the chemists have moved way past those....

norm · March 2012

the extra playoff game(s) are purely for more tv revenue

Wobbie · March 2012

Monster Rain wrote:

this year they are a safe bet at a playoff spot even if one of the other NL East teams has improved enough to overtake them in the standings since Howard's hurt, Oswalt's gone, and DC and Miami both made some serious improvements this winter.

I think Atlanta's their biggest threat :shifty:

Wobbie · March 2012

norm wrote:

the extra playoff game(s) are purely for more tv revenue

you're saying it's about money?? no way

norm · March 2012

imalive wrote:

norm wrote:

the extra playoff game(s) are purely for more tv revenue

you're saying it's about money?? no way

i know...call me crazy

Jearlpam0925 · March 2012

Monster Rain wrote:

I could argue that you only like this because it helps the Phillies the same way you think I hate it because I'm a Yankees fan. Last year they wouldn't have face Carpenter twice and this year they are a safe bet at a playoff spot even if one of the other NL East teams has improved enough to overtake them in the standings since Howard's hurt, Oswalt's gone, and DC and Miami both made some serious improvements this winter.

Of course I like it because it would've hurt the Cards. That's what I'm saying. What distinct advantage did a 102 major league-best-in-wins team have over a team that squeeked into the playoffs? Nothing more than one more home playoff game. If you want to say the LDS should be 7 games, I'm all for it, but what advantage did they have in that series? Barely any other than one more home game. Actually, the wild card teams are winning the LDS series more often than the divisional winners(54% of the time),. So, again, what distinct advantage does winning your division, or having the best record in your league mean? None. Agreed the All-Star game being the deciding factor of who gets home field in the WS is preposterous, but I have a feeling that will change with the format - or it might not.

On a semi-related note - the second most overrated thing in baseball is calling Selig out for being a moron and destroying the game. Second only to people who think its a disgrace to the game when someone takes steroids. In both cases, gimme a break. That old dude hasn't perpetually done horrible things to the league. I could count probably on one hand what everyone's gripe is with this old fossil. Which I also find ironic, when people call him an old senile bastard, yet he's been more progressive in growing the sport than any other commissioner before him.

Cliffy6745 · March 2012

Jearlpam0925 wrote:

On a semi-related note - the second most overrated thing in baseball is calling Selig out for being a moron and destroying the game. Second only to people who think its a disgrace to the game when someone takes steroids. In both cases, gimme a break. That old dude hasn't perpetually done horrible things to the league. I could count probably on one hand what everyone's gripe is with this old fossil. Which I also find ironic, when people call him an old senile bastard, yet he's been more progressive in growing the sport than any other commissioner before him.

Boom

Jearlpam0925 · March 2012

norm wrote:

imalive wrote:

norm wrote:

the extra playoff game(s) are purely for more tv revenue

you're saying it's about money?? no way

i know...call me crazy

And I'm pretty sure bears shit in the woods. Even if it is, who cares? I'm a fiend for the sport and it makes it that more intriguing to watch.

polaris_x · March 2012

imalive wrote:

3. Steroids cause life-threatening harms.
Good ethics starts with good facts, and the claims on this point are, to understate the case, seriously overstated. Articles abound in the mass media on the life-threatening risks of anabolic steroids: cancer, heart disease, stroke, and so on. What is missing are peer-reviewed articles in scientific journals to support the claims. Quick: name an athlete who died, or was diagnosed, with steroid-related cancer, heart disease, or stroke. Cases are so hard to find that the prohibitionists have to make them up. So Lyle Alzado, the NFL all-star, is presented on the front page of the New York Times and the cover of Sports Illustrated because of an alleged steroid-related brain tumor. What is missing is a single article, or evidence, or even a quote from any authority on the topic to support any connection between steroids and Alzado's tumor.

and that was written about anabolic steroids....to my knowledge, the chemists have moved way past those....

what about flo-jo? "professional" wrestlers? many football players?

Wobbie · March 2012

polaris_x wrote:

what about flo-jo? "professional" wrestlers? many football players?

wrestlers maybe. Flo Jo probably did some 'roids but they didn't cause her death (at least not officially). I don't believe any football players' deaths have been linked to steroids. The violence of the game has definitely lead to deaths.

The Juggler · March 2012

Monster Rain wrote:

If Bud Selig really wanted to make the division titles mean something more than they do now he would have asked the union to agree to revert back to 2 divisions and had 2 Wild Card teams play the 2 division winners or just had 2 divisions and go back to having just the LCS and World Series. You want drama? Picture NY, Boston, and Tampa Bay fighting for 1 playoff spot or St. Louis, Philadelphia, Milwaukee, and Atlanta fighting for the divison title. I don't doubt that Selig believes the extra playoff game is good for the game, but I think he's wrong about it and I think it would never have happened if there wasn't money to be made from it. This is the same guy who thinks having the All-Star Game decide home-field advantage in the World Series is a great idea, after all.

.

well said.

polaris_x · March 2012

imalive wrote:

wrestlers maybe. Flo Jo probably did some 'roids but they didn't cause her death (at least not officially). I don't believe any football players' deaths have been linked to steroids. The violence of the game has definitely lead to deaths.

yeah ... i dunno ... why are they illegal then if not because of it's side effects?

norm · March 2012

imalive wrote:

I don't believe any football players' deaths have been linked to steroids.

lyle alzado

Jearlpam0925 · March 2012

polaris_x wrote:

imalive wrote:

wrestlers maybe. Flo Jo probably did some 'roids but they didn't cause her death (at least not officially). I don't believe any football players' deaths have been linked to steroids. The violence of the game has definitely lead to deaths.

yeah ... i dunno ... why are they illegal then if not because of it's side effects?

Because he's spent a majority of his life watching Barry Bonds playing for his home team. Giants fans have been brainwashed.

This doesn't mean I am some avid supporter of the anti-steroids/get up on my high horse viewpoint, but it really is funny to see how all Giants fans feel about the matter.

Wobbie · March 2012

norm wrote:

imalive wrote:

I don't believe any football players' deaths have been linked to steroids.

lyle alzado

there's no evidence that steroids caused the brain tumor. besides, he started using anabolics in 1969....not exactly the same stuff as is out there now.

MLB 2025 Season

Comments

Categories