OT- A-ROID tested postive in 03

[conditionfreak]

I'd probably take steroids for $500 million in contracts. I'd probably lie to Katie Couric about it too.

 

The big question is, would you lie to her and say that you were single?

[JohnT]

*sigh*

 

Again, for those coming late, if this was a 'guaranteed' steroid aided season, why was it his only one? 24 was his 2nd best HR total. Did he quit using? If so, why?

 

As noted before, SI did a great article on Anderson's 1996 season last summer.

 

Many people stopped using for a variety of reasons: fear of getting caught, concern over the freaky effects (they aren't all positive!), or losing a supplier.

 

 

You know this for a fact? Who stopped/ Why? I'm aware of the POSSIBLE reasons, and, being a physician, know the effects. Losing a supplier? C'mon... it's not like these guys had trouble locating supplies. Fear of being caught? In 1996?

 

Anderson seems suspicious, but he never really bulked up.

 

Len Dykstra and the sta-puft David Segui stand out more for me.

 

The details of the Steroid Era are only coming out in dribs and drabs for a reason. Juicing always had a stigma, if for no other reason that players didn't want to be seen as cheating and getting by on anything other than their natural abilities.

 

Even at the peak of this stuff it wasn't like you could go down to the corner drugstore and get the various drugs we're talking about here. The supply networks were relatively limited for the more elaborate things like clear and cream.

 

And the side effects can be life-altering, as you know. These drugs can affect your personality, and thus your relationships and family life. And the physical affects can be huge, like sexual dysfunction.

 

A nifty rephrasing of your original post....

 

Who stopped/Why? Your OP suggests you can state this for a fact. And please...don't offer the suggestion that suppliers were a limiting factor. Any gym rat could line up a player with a supplier. BALCO/Conte's operation got rolling in about '99 so is irrelevant in the discussion of Anderson's 1996 season and why his numbers dropped off.

 

It's possible he stopped.... but I find it likely that he would have restarted at some point for contract reasons or glory seeking.

 

Why repeat myself, I already gave my opinions.

 

And I haven't mentioned Brady Anderson in this entire thread. I didn't read the SI article and I've never read anything about whether he used steroids. But now that you mention it, his big year is about as suspicious as you can get. 50 homers from a well established mediocre player.

[JohnT]

(thumbs u

 

I hadn't heard he admitted using....

 

I do remember his previous Palmeiro-like denial. I also remember people scoffing when crazy Jose Canseco claimed ARod used.

 

Canseco's been pretty reliable so far.

[JohnT]

Well he's obviously admitted to using steroids in an interview with Peter Gammons/ESPN...

 

So now we'll hear the spin about how he was "forced" to use it due to everyone else using and his agony of wanting to come clean but fearful of the ramifications, etc, etc...

 

Bottomline: He was caught and is now trying to spin his way out of a bad situation. Highly unlikely...

 

The Giambi model doesn't work in this situation as he was never hyped as the best player in baseball nor repeatedly heralded as the prototype clean player...

 

Jim

 

I think you have to give him a little credit...just a little. He admitted to using steroids for 3 years, which he didn't have to do. And he didn't come up with some bogus reason for using them, he just said he felt pressure to produce and prove himself a great player. Not admirable that he did it, but at least, when caught, he fessed up.

 

Kinda sad that that's like a breath of fresh air compared to Bonds and McGwire and Clemens.

[awe4one]

Well he's obviously admitted to using steroids in an interview with Peter Gammons/ESPN...

 

So now we'll hear the spin about how he was "forced" to use it due to everyone else using and his agony of wanting to come clean but fearful of the ramifications, etc, etc...

 

Bottomline: He was caught and is now trying to spin his way out of a bad situation. Highly unlikely...

 

The Giambi model doesn't work in this situation as he was never hyped as the best player in baseball nor repeatedly heralded as the prototype clean player...

 

Jim

 

I think you have to give him a little credit...just a little. He admitted to using steroids for 3 years, which he didn't have to do. And he didn't come up with some bogus reason for using them, he just said he felt pressure to produce and prove himself a great player. Not admirable that he did it, but at least, when caught, he fessed up.

 

Kinda sad that that's like a breath of fresh air compared to Bonds and McGwire and Clemens.

 

He was coached and lying throughout the entire interview. He didn't know what he was taking nor where he got it? Come-on...that's a load of . Also, Gammons, I'm not sure if it was intentional or not, caught him in a major inconsistancy. He said he wasn't lying to Couric because he didn't think he had done any "bad" steroids...but then later admitted he was worried when Bonds broke the record that people would find out about his prior steroid use, an event that happened before the Couric interview.

 

He gets no credit in my book...he was vague throughout the interview. And it was far from coming clean about his use...

 

Jim

[500Club]

*sigh*

 

Again, for those coming late, if this was a 'guaranteed' steroid aided season, why was it his only one? 24 was his 2nd best HR total. Did he quit using? If so, why?

 

As noted before, SI did a great article on Anderson's 1996 season last summer.

 

Many people stopped using for a variety of reasons: fear of getting caught, concern over the freaky effects (they aren't all positive!), or losing a supplier.

 

 

You know this for a fact? Who stopped/ Why? I'm aware of the POSSIBLE reasons, and, being a physician, know the effects. Losing a supplier? C'mon... it's not like these guys had trouble locating supplies. Fear of being caught? In 1996?

 

Anderson seems suspicious, but he never really bulked up.

 

Len Dykstra and the sta-puft David Segui stand out more for me.

 

The details of the Steroid Era are only coming out in dribs and drabs for a reason. Juicing always had a stigma, if for no other reason that players didn't want to be seen as cheating and getting by on anything other than their natural abilities.

 

Even at the peak of this stuff it wasn't like you could go down to the corner drugstore and get the various drugs we're talking about here. The supply networks were relatively limited for the more elaborate things like clear and cream.

 

And the side effects can be life-altering, as you know. These drugs can affect your personality, and thus your relationships and family life. And the physical affects can be huge, like sexual dysfunction.

 

A nifty rephrasing of your original post....

 

Who stopped/Why? Your OP suggests you can state this for a fact. And please...don't offer the suggestion that suppliers were a limiting factor. Any gym rat could line up a player with a supplier. BALCO/Conte's operation got rolling in about '99 so is irrelevant in the discussion of Anderson's 1996 season and why his numbers dropped off.

 

It's possible he stopped.... but I find it likely that he would have restarted at some point for contract reasons or glory seeking.

 

Why repeat myself, I already gave my opinions.

 

And I haven't mentioned Brady Anderson in this entire thread. I didn't read the SI article and I've never read anything about whether he used steroids. But now that you mention it, his big year is about as suspicious as you can get. 50 homers from a well established mediocre player.

 

Another vague response. You already repeated yourself, btw.

 

I like how the icon is used in lieu of a fact based response. When the insults start flying, you know that party has run dry of constructive arguments.

 

I do agree with you about Canseco's being right more often than baseball would like, and I also agree that it is sad that ARod coming clean is like a breath of fresh air.

[JohnT]

*sigh*

 

Again, for those coming late, if this was a 'guaranteed' steroid aided season, why was it his only one? 24 was his 2nd best HR total. Did he quit using? If so, why?

 

As noted before, SI did a great article on Anderson's 1996 season last summer.

 

Many people stopped using for a variety of reasons: fear of getting caught, concern over the freaky effects (they aren't all positive!), or losing a supplier.

 

 

You know this for a fact? Who stopped/ Why? I'm aware of the POSSIBLE reasons, and, being a physician, know the effects. Losing a supplier? C'mon... it's not like these guys had trouble locating supplies. Fear of being caught? In 1996?

 

Anderson seems suspicious, but he never really bulked up.

 

Len Dykstra and the sta-puft David Segui stand out more for me.

 

The details of the Steroid Era are only coming out in dribs and drabs for a reason. Juicing always had a stigma, if for no other reason that players didn't want to be seen as cheating and getting by on anything other than their natural abilities.

 

Even at the peak of this stuff it wasn't like you could go down to the corner drugstore and get the various drugs we're talking about here. The supply networks were relatively limited for the more elaborate things like clear and cream.

 

And the side effects can be life-altering, as you know. These drugs can affect your personality, and thus your relationships and family life. And the physical affects can be huge, like sexual dysfunction.

 

A nifty rephrasing of your original post....

 

Who stopped/Why? Your OP suggests you can state this for a fact. And please...don't offer the suggestion that suppliers were a limiting factor. Any gym rat could line up a player with a supplier. BALCO/Conte's operation got rolling in about '99 so is irrelevant in the discussion of Anderson's 1996 season and why his numbers dropped off.

 

It's possible he stopped.... but I find it likely that he would have restarted at some point for contract reasons or glory seeking.

 

Why repeat myself, I already gave my opinions.

 

And I haven't mentioned Brady Anderson in this entire thread. I didn't read the SI article and I've never read anything about whether he used steroids. But now that you mention it, his big year is about as suspicious as you can get. 50 homers from a well established mediocre player.

 

Another vague response. You already repeated yourself, btw.

 

I like how the icon is used in lieu of a fact based response. When the insults start flying, you know that party has run dry of constructive arguments.

 

I do agree with you about Canseco's being right more often than baseball would like, and I also agree that it is sad that ARod coming clean is like a breath of fresh air.

 

Like I said, I already gave my answer. I'm not going to be bullied into going out and writing a research paper to prove them right. Take them for what they're worth and move on.

[JohnT]

Well he's obviously admitted to using steroids in an interview with Peter Gammons/ESPN...

 

So now we'll hear the spin about how he was "forced" to use it due to everyone else using and his agony of wanting to come clean but fearful of the ramifications, etc, etc...

 

Bottomline: He was caught and is now trying to spin his way out of a bad situation. Highly unlikely...

 

The Giambi model doesn't work in this situation as he was never hyped as the best player in baseball nor repeatedly heralded as the prototype clean player...

 

Jim

 

I think you have to give him a little credit...just a little. He admitted to using steroids for 3 years, which he didn't have to do. And he didn't come up with some bogus reason for using them, he just said he felt pressure to produce and prove himself a great player. Not admirable that he did it, but at least, when caught, he fessed up.

 

Kinda sad that that's like a breath of fresh air compared to Bonds and McGwire and Clemens.

 

He was coached and lying throughout the entire interview. He didn't know what he was taking nor where he got it? Come-on...that's a load of . Also, Gammons, I'm not sure if it was intentional or not, caught him in a major inconsistancy. He said he wasn't lying to Couric because he didn't think he had done any "bad" steroids...but then later admitted he was worried when Bonds broke the record that people would find out about his prior steroid use, an event that happened before the Couric interview.

 

He gets no credit in my book...he was vague throughout the interview. And it was far from coming clean about his use...

 

Jim

 

Didn't see the interview, just read a few quotes.

 

Didn't know he said that he didn't know where he got them.

[500Club]

*sigh*

 

Again, for those coming late, if this was a 'guaranteed' steroid aided season, why was it his only one? 24 was his 2nd best HR total. Did he quit using? If so, why?

 

As noted before, SI did a great article on Anderson's 1996 season last summer.

 

Many people stopped using for a variety of reasons: fear of getting caught, concern over the freaky effects (they aren't all positive!), or losing a supplier.

 

 

You know this for a fact? Who stopped/ Why? I'm aware of the POSSIBLE reasons, and, being a physician, know the effects. Losing a supplier? C'mon... it's not like these guys had trouble locating supplies. Fear of being caught? In 1996?

 

Anderson seems suspicious, but he never really bulked up.

 

Len Dykstra and the sta-puft David Segui stand out more for me.

 

The details of the Steroid Era are only coming out in dribs and drabs for a reason. Juicing always had a stigma, if for no other reason that players didn't want to be seen as cheating and getting by on anything other than their natural abilities.

 

Even at the peak of this stuff it wasn't like you could go down to the corner drugstore and get the various drugs we're talking about here. The supply networks were relatively limited for the more elaborate things like clear and cream.

 

And the side effects can be life-altering, as you know. These drugs can affect your personality, and thus your relationships and family life. And the physical affects can be huge, like sexual dysfunction.

 

A nifty rephrasing of your original post....

 

Who stopped/Why? Your OP suggests you can state this for a fact. And please...don't offer the suggestion that suppliers were a limiting factor. Any gym rat could line up a player with a supplier. BALCO/Conte's operation got rolling in about '99 so is irrelevant in the discussion of Anderson's 1996 season and why his numbers dropped off.

 

It's possible he stopped.... but I find it likely that he would have restarted at some point for contract reasons or glory seeking.

 

Why repeat myself, I already gave my opinions.

 

And I haven't mentioned Brady Anderson in this entire thread. I didn't read the SI article and I've never read anything about whether he used steroids. But now that you mention it, his big year is about as suspicious as you can get. 50 homers from a well established mediocre player.

 

Another vague response. You already repeated yourself, btw.

 

I like how the icon is used in lieu of a fact based response. When the insults start flying, you know that party has run dry of constructive arguments.

 

I do agree with you about Canseco's being right more often than baseball would like, and I also agree that it is sad that ARod coming clean is like a breath of fresh air.

 

Like I said, I already gave my answer. I'm not going to be bullied into going out and writing a research paper to prove them right. Take them for what they're worth and move on.

 

The problem was they weren't worth anything.

[Rodey]

A-Rod's answer to Gammon's question, "What made you decide to stop taking steroids?"

 

"It was during spring training and I got a horrible pain in my neck and back....for 2 weeks."

 

Hehehe. Anyways, he said he did steroids. I'm moving on.

[kidcolt]

Just because he admitted to it don't make it better. Remember he denied it only 2 years ago, he is only admitting to it now because the results got leaked. ARod is no better then any of the other guys, they all cheated. I give him no credit because he lied about it when he was first asked.

 

 

 

Well he's obviously admitted to using steroids in an interview with Peter Gammons/ESPN...

 

So now we'll hear the spin about how he was "forced" to use it due to everyone else using and his agony of wanting to come clean but fearful of the ramifications, etc, etc...

 

Bottomline: He was caught and is now trying to spin his way out of a bad situation. Highly unlikely...

 

The Giambi model doesn't work in this situation as he was never hyped as the best player in baseball nor repeatedly heralded as the prototype clean player...

 

Jim

 

I think you have to give him a little credit...just a little. He admitted to using steroids for 3 years, which he didn't have to do. And he didn't come up with some bogus reason for using them, he just said he felt pressure to produce and prove himself a great player. Not admirable that he did it, but at least, when caught, he fessed up.

 

Kinda sad that that's like a breath of fresh air compared to Bonds and McGwire and Clemens.

[supapimp]

great read and article:

 

We've got to get past 'baseball history'

 

Posted: February 9, 2009

Will Leitch

For Sporting News

 

Why does everyone keep saying Alex Rodriguez was baseball's last great hope? Apparently, the theory is now that he's been "exposed" as a steroid abuser, we no longer have any reasonable alternative to Barry Bonds as the Guy Who Holds All The Records. Columnists are claiming that A-Rod was the player we could have all gotten behind, the historically great player who would have erased Barry Bonds from the record books.

 

This doesn't make any sense. First off, I never got the sense that anyone was ever behind A-Rod for anything. The same people who are supposedly disappointed in their hero were the ones calling him "A-Fraud" about, oh, four days ago. But more to the point: Obsessing over the darned record books was what got us into this mess in the first place.

 

Baseball is a beautiful, blessed, sacred game. Every contest is full of infinite subplots, tiny human dramas, adding up to a final score that only gives us a hint of all that went into it.

 

It's not just Major League Baseball, either; baseball is gorgeous whether it's played by steroid monsters or Little Leaguers. But to hear it the last few years, baseball is nothing but big historic numbers to be discussed as relevant or not.

 

Who cares that Pete Rose is the all-time hits leader? Who cares if Bonds has more homers than anyone else? Who cares if Roger Clemens won the most Cy Youngs? When did baseball become about that? Baseball is a lovely, delicate game, three hours of Shakespeare 16 times a day, and, somehow, we've turned it into a math problem about longevity.

 

So, a humble suggestion to my fellow media folk: Let's stop caring about records. Let's stop claiming that the foundation of baseball is its statistics and its history. Because it flatly isn't true. Baseball attendance is up dramatically. Profit is up across the board. More people care about baseball, worldwide, than any other time in human history.

 

Yet, for some reason, everyone wants it to be 1950 or something.

 

You know what getting back to baseball's past means? It means Yankee Stadium half-empty the day Roger Maris hits No. 61. It means players being treated so poorly by the owners that they had to find jobs in the offseason. It means every fan having the opportunity to watch every game, instead of hoping to catch an occasional glimpse of KMOX's signal if you're at a high enough elevation.

 

You know what, people? Baseball's past stunk. Why is everyone pretending that baseball is about Mickey Mantle and Hank Aaron? It's not. Baseball records aren't anything but a link to sportswriters' childhoods. This era is different than eras past. This would seem obvious. So why is everyone having such a hard time accepting it?

 

If Alex Rodriguez had never been busted for steroids, and he had eradicated all of Bonds' records, Barry Bonds would have still existed. A record broken doesn't mean the achievements (or their dubious sources) went away. You can't erase the past. You can't relive it, either. You have to let it go. The issue is not which players used steroids in 2003, or whether you can trust Alex Rodriguez again. We will never know who used steroids, and who didn't. Let's try to accept that, and move on.

 

But we can't. Somehow, not knowing the whole story is driving us crazy. But we never knew the whole story. We can't. The past is over. Baseball has always been about its future. Where did we go wrong here? Mark McGwire said he didn't want to talk about the past. At the time, it sounded like a creative way to avoid answering questions. (And it was, of course.) But now . . . that's about the only strategy we have left. It's time to let it go. We'll never know. Records will always be tainted. So what? There's a pretty awesome game being played. Let's try to enjoy it.

[JohnT]

Interesting article, but the idea the records aren't important to the game is certainly a minority one. This guy must not have grown up collecting baseball cards and reading stats. Baseball to me has always been about stats and heros and all-stars and comparing your team and your players to other teams and players.

 

But to each their own. My stepmother lives and breathes baseball but she could care less about stats, kind of like this guy.

[Monstro]

i don’t know, i love baseballs history. comparing players with all the ones who have come before, to me is part of what make the game so great.

[conditionfreak]

Miguel Tijada just charged with lying to Congress c/w steroid use. Apparently he was charged with lying about knowing another player used steroids. He said he didn't know (to Congress), but now says he did know. So, he is being charged in order to get him to "talk" about others I believe. I think this thing is going to keep growing.

 

In response to supapimps quoted article. I am not a baseball fan, but those around me that are, and are huge fans, live and breath the stats. Those in the Fantasy Leagues love and need the stats. The history of baseball is nothing but stats.

 

The article writer has it all wrong when it comes to understanding baseball and its fans. It is all about the stats. The records. It ain't about watching the game. Heck, go to a game and most are bored stiff and talking on their cell phones or are talking with their friends there with them, and not even paying attention to the game. The most often words spoken at a baseball game probably are "what happened", or "I missed it", or "Hey beer man!"

[supapimp]

here's the transcript for the interview between peter gammons of espn and A-liar:

 

loosey goosey

 

 

[JohnT]

The most often words spoken at a baseball game probably are "what happened", or "I missed it", or "Hey beer man!"

 

[MR.COMICBOOK]

Pete Rose upset about A-RODS cheating, talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Pete Rose critical of Arods cheating.