Alex Rodriguez confirms use of steroids
by Randy Booth on Feb 9, 2009 3:41 PM EST
in News
Email
PrintAlex Rodriguez did the best thing possible and admitted to using steroids today:
Alex Rodriguez admitted in an interview with ESPN on Monday that he used performance-enhancing drugs for several seasons at the beginning of this decade, but he said he has not used the substances since then.
“When I arrived at Texas in 2001 I felt an enormous amount of pressure to perform,” Rodriguez told Peter Gammons.
He added: “Back then it was a different culture. It was loose. I was young. I was stupid. I was naïve. And I wanted to prove to everyone that I was worth being one of the greatest players of all time. I did take a banned substance, and for that I am very sorry and deeply regretful."
81 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Seriously, this was a brilliant move. What has haunted guys like giambi/bonds/sosa and pals the most? the fact that they give wishy washy maybe responses and do things like apologize for nothing in particular. Even pettite wasnt this specific. Hats off to a-rod for coming clean on this and eliminating speculation that wouldv followed him all season long.
by spinz on Feb 9, 2009 4:33 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
oh yeah, but that said, his credibility is still forever damaged and his legacy in jeopardy…..sorry a-fraud…
by spinz on Feb 9, 2009 4:35 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
If this goes the McGwire rout … no Hall of Fame for A-Rod.
by Randy Booth on Feb 9, 2009 4:36 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Steroids clearly made him significantly better than he previously was.
Except that they didn’t. He was the best player in the league before steroids and he’s been at worst the 2nd best since he stopped taking them, including having his best season as a pro in 2007, when he was presumably clean.
Tools Whore
Sign Bonds!
by Tyler on Feb 9, 2009 5:48 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
But, the muscles built up while on steroids don't just stop work once you quit using.
by bdalebs on Feb 9, 2009 5:57 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
But his performance never spiked. It remained relatively constant throughout his career.
Also, if you’re not training exceptionally hard, you will lose the muscle mass over time. Three years is plenty of time to lose any muscle mass attained by using steroids.
Tools Whore
Sign Bonds!
by Tyler on Feb 9, 2009 6:23 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Okay, let me try to explain what I meant.
If he built up his muscles to point where he can lift 300 pounds (random number) while on steroids [which are used to allow for quicker recovery], he would still be able to lift 300 pounds a year after quitting steroids if he kept lifting that amount. He used the steroids to help grow the muscles at a faster rate, and once he stopped, he could have plateaued at that level if he continued to lift. My guess is that he couldn’t lift as often without the steroids, so he lost a little muscle – hence the drop off from the 50+ home runs he hit per year from 2001 to 2003 to the 40-ish he’s hit every year as a MFY. And he hit just under 40 per year before 2001.
by bdalebs on Feb 9, 2009 6:51 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
The drop off in power
could easily be explained by the fact that Texas is a bandbox and Yankee stadium is death on right hand hitters. And the fact that he averaged under 40 home runs while a Mariner if pretty easily explained by the fact that he was 23 when he left there. Not exactly in his prime.
Tools Whore
Sign Bonds!
by Tyler on Feb 9, 2009 7:21 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I understand what you're saying
but I really don’t see a significant difference that can’t be explained by a normal age curve. He was the best prospect since Griffey and absurdly talented. Could steriods have helped him? Of course, but I really don’t think they honestly did that much for his performance if in fact he’s telling the truth about the time frame he did steroids in.
Tools Whore
Sign Bonds!
by Tyler on Feb 9, 2009 7:23 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I don't know.
Maybe he wouldn’t have done as well. Maybe, since he didn’t know what he tested positive for, he was taking the wrong stuff. He did use PEDs though, and it’s against the law. There’s no arguing that.
by bdalebs on Feb 9, 2009 8:01 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
They weren't technically banned at the time,
were they?
by Schulz on Feb 10, 2009 10:44 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Fay Vincent's "banning" had no weight.
Baseball didn’t truly outlaw usage until 2003.
by R.J. Anderson on Feb 10, 2009 9:32 PM EST up reply actions
I'm pretty sure thats not how it works.
The benefits of steroids are not just pure strength. Better explosiveness and quicker recoveries are also big parts of it.
by BTLove on Feb 9, 2009 8:52 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
It doesn't make you more explosive.
It does increase your recovery. Explosiveness comes from training muscles in a specific manner. If your working on your fast twitch muscles trying to create explosiveness and you’re working out in a typical bodybuilding manner, you’re going to fail miserably. You’ll get big (particularly if you’re on juice), but you’re not getting more explosive. You have to do explosive movements to create explosiveness.
Tools Whore
Sign Bonds!
by Tyler on Feb 9, 2009 9:37 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
It's always been my thought...
that steroids don’t affect the hand-eye, timing and zone judgment needed to hit lots of home runs. However, there is a recovery effect that makes players better able to handle day game after a night game and the 162 game schedule. Also, I think there’s a substantial placebo effect happening. The steroids boost confidence and that in turn, may boost production.
Finally, the long-term effects of prolonged steroid use in terms of making players more injury-prone is totally underrated by most who take them.
by Danno11 on Feb 9, 2009 10:37 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Incorrect.
1)Steroids do make you more explosive. Ask Ben Johnson or any track athlete. More fast twich muscle-more explosive.
2)Steroids do make you recover faster.
3)You do not keep your strength after steroids are stopped, regardless of how much you work out. You still may be stronger than pre-steroids, however.
4)Of course steroids do not affect hand-eye coordination. The allow you to swing the bat with more momentum and maintain that momentum during and after bat contact, which is what produces power.
5)ARod probably was taking roids before Texas (at least according to JC).
6)ARod and others probably continue to take things-it is far easier, if you try, to not ger caught than to get caught. For example, ARod likely got caught because he took testosterone, which clears the body slowly. If he had just taken primobolan, which clears fast and does not give you the bulky look, he probably would have come up clean.
by Buzzy on Feb 10, 2009 9:27 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Steroids do not make you more explosive.
Steroids help build muscle and aide in recovery. Ben Johnson got more explosive because he was training his fast twitch muscles in a very specific manner. Did steroids help that? Sure, but steroids are not what made him more explosive, his training was. We have no way of knowing how fast he would have been without steroids.
If I took steroids, went to the gym and did a typical bodybuilding style workout, I would not get faster or more explosive. In fact, I would almost certainly get slower. You get faster and more explosive because of specific types of training. Steroids help that, no doubt, but it’s not the steroids that make you more explosive.
I guess we’re kind of arguing semantics here, but my point remains that it’s not the steroids making the explosiveness. It’s the type of training. The steroids aide in the muscle recovery and building of muscle, which when paired with explosive training can improve speed more than would probably been otherwise possible. But without that specific training, even taking steroids and sticking to a strict diet and workout program, you will see strength gains, but gains in explosiveness will be nonexistent.
Tools Whore
Sign Bonds!
by Tyler on Feb 10, 2009 11:59 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
?
If you mean if you took steroids and ate cake and sat on your ass, then I agree, it does not make you more explosive. If you take steroids and work out, and build muscles that you will need in the task in question, you will perform that task more “explosively.” There are not special “explosiveness” exercises to do-if you are stronger in those areas it it because you have built the fast twich muscles (slow twich do not grow in this way). That is it. The last part of you post is just wrong.
by Buzzy on Feb 10, 2009 1:11 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
There absolutely are ways to build "fast twitch" muscles.
You build them by doing things like Olympic lifts, full sprints, and plyometrics. You increase them by doing things that cause your fast twitch muscles to fire at or close to their max.
If you are taking steroids and trying to bench press 500 lbs, squat 700lbs, dead lift 800lbs and look like Ronnie Coleman, you’re not going to become more explosive, you’re going to become a monster, strong as an ox and slow as dirt.
Tools Whore
Sign Bonds!
by Tyler on Feb 10, 2009 3:06 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Nah
plyometrics are not ways to “build” fast twich muscles. It is aimed at increasing explosive movement via increased nuronal connections, elasticity and innervation of the muscle. It is not an efficient way to build the strength of the muscle, and has never been proven of value for its stated goal. In this regard it boils again down to semantics-you increase strength and speed by working out and by repetative training of the task. If that is track, you get globally stronger and you sprint…a lot. (That is why most sprinters look like bodybuilders, and some have even stated that a goal IS an increased bench press-there was a whole article in the NY Times about that in 2004). If it is Barry Bonds, you work out and take lots of batting practice. The reason Ronnie Coleman can’t hit a baseball far, aside from the lack of joint health and muscle elasticity in someone of this exteme degree of steroid abuse, is that he doesn’t play baseball, and never practices the task.
Woah.
I think you guys are defining “explosive” differently. It sounds like Buzzy means with more force through out, and Tyler means a quicker burst up to full strength.
Not really.
the idea behind plyometrics is to maximize the force over a short interval, as you say. However, there is no good evidence that the approaches designed to do this do any more than resistance training plus reps of the thing you are trying to optimize. For example, in sprinting there is no good evidence that plyometrics+weight training + training (eg sprinting) is better than weight training+training. There are claims that the combination of plyometric +weight training is better than either alone in this regard, but the evidence looks shaky to me. Furthermore, even proponents of plyometrics admit that it is not effective for upper body burst. Basically, the point is-if you just take steroids +resistance training +batting practice you most certainly will improve your ability to drive the ball, despite the claims above. I imagine this is basically what Bonds did (at the very least he was a gym rat of the standard type, not a “plyometrics” fiend).
I do agree that it is not the steroids in and of themselves that allow a sprinter to run faster, or Bonds to drive the ball more. I never said that. What I said was steroids+strength training+context specfic training (eg sprinting or hitting) will allow one to carry out that task in a more “explosive” manner.
Turn them loose.
This is the only baseball blog I read, so I am going to vent here.
There is no longer any way baseball can hold on to it’s history from a statistical standpoint at all. Comparing players today is apples to oranges vs 2 decades ago. The last little fingertip hold baseball had on salvaging some equally balanced comparison between generations is officially ripped from MLB now with A-Rod being tainted when he erases the tainted Bonds records. The statistical savior fell.
As a logically thinking person, I can’t see anything else to do but have seperate records. Baseball as we knew it ended around 1985. Everything since has been a different league and should have different records, otherwise there is absolutely no point to even keeping statistical records at all. I say baseball should determine when to set the B.R. / A. R. line. I think 1985 is close to ground zero, making all records prior to 1985 “Before Roids” and all during and after “After Roids”. I’m not saying put little asterics next to things, I am saying an entirely different book.
Before you call me an idiot, and whatever the opposite of a baseball purist is, you need to read about SARMs. Baseball Prospectus Report
This type of stuff is everywhere. It is thick. Players are taking stuff right now that we won’t even know about for 10 years, and won’t have testing measures in place to curb for 20. MLB is fighting a losing battle. I say, reset the records at 1985. Turn them all loose to continue to use their stuff, but legally. If they want to risk their long term health for it, it is their freedom.
We can’t continue to pretend we can stop this, and it is foolish to pretend the records are still independent of the underlying steroid issue. The records today (and not just the power numbers) are being set relative to the body types people are building today. Body types that are not naturally occurring and are FAR different than the ones players had in 1982.
Why not? Why are PEDs really illegal anyway? Because it isn’t fair? It is even less fair this way, when only a select few are getting away with it secretly and we have to guess. Because our kids might try them? Maybe MLB and co. should take some of the money they are wasting trying to police it, and put it towards education and awareness. Because of the health issues? Sounds like they are hammering them out with the latest round of SARMs. Some have little to no side effects. Maybe if they were getting actual legal, dose controlled roids from their team doctors and trainers we wouldn’t have people getting God knows what from Mexico and OD’ing on horse steroids. Plus we would have a controlled research sample then, and could more precisely develop and study the real effects.
Turn them all loose. There is no other realistic alternative.
Go Hawks!
by CUNKNNK on Feb 9, 2009 4:36 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
im tempted to agree with you on a number of points. Particularly about how the reasons for PED’s illegality are on the decline. Obviously these things work and the health side effects can be controlled too. But im not ready to say we should make separate record books. The fact of the matter is forms of cheating have always existed in baseball. Are we going to create a third record book for the spitball era? Because the modern age we live in, these things can come to light much more easily and its impossible to say nobody was cheating at any one particular time. So really baseball has to think hard on how to define their stance on steroids and move forward. If baseball were to decide to embrace PED’s theres alot of potential consequences they’d have to think long and hard about.
by spinz on Feb 9, 2009 4:51 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Although...
…where do you draw the line? Should we have separate records pre-1947? Because some of the best players of all time were in the Negro Leagues, not the AL or NL. Should we have separate records pre-1961? Because eight extra games per season have an effect on lots of statistics. Should we have separate records pre-expansion? Because that’s definitely diluted the talent pool. Should we have separate records pre-1973? Because the DH has a pretty big effect on statistics. Should we have separate records for the spitball era? Should we have separate records for this era of small ballparks?
by RSNexile on Feb 9, 2009 5:11 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
He said '85.
I’d say just stop putting emphasis on records. Compare players with other current players, and only for the same season.
by bdalebs on Feb 9, 2009 5:59 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
He said '85 because of steroids
But what about black players, more games, expansion, the DH, changes in the rules, and ballpark effects?
I agree that we shouldn’t put so much emphasis on records, but if you want to put an asterisk on records because of some factor specific to contemporary players, it doesn’t make sense not to add an asterisk because of other factors.
by RSNexile on Feb 9, 2009 7:22 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Exactly.
Even without steroids players partake in better training, better skill building, use better gear. Not to mention the much bigger pool of players with the influx of international talent (as well as simple increase in population). Eras are different. Look at the deadball era, or lowering the mound. Or the better bats. There are just so many variables that its always been crazy to compare across eras. And now we have the juiced era. No bigger reason to change the records now than 60 years ago.
by BTLove on Feb 9, 2009 8:57 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Exactly
I said this in a past post, it sucks that we let PEDs get out of control, but to say we need to asterix all records is a little harsh and ignores the fact that through out the life of baseball there have been numerous times when some people were either at an unfair advantage or disadvantage, and MLB adjusts just like it has now with cracking down on steroid use. To say the records are forever tarnished and to completely separate now and the past is jumping the gun, every era was different and technically you can’t compare players purely on stats from any 2 different eras, especially in a game like baseball where a batter’s stats is so heavily dependent on the quality of pitching he is up against and vice versa. Like RSNexile points out, the deadball era highly favored pitchers, so should we asterix pitcher’s achievements from that time? How about when there was the Negro league? or small ballparks era? how about during war? should we boost their stats to account for the time lost while serving like Ted Williams? How about pre-relievers era, should we discredit hitter because they faced a lower quality of pitching in the later innings as the pitcher would tire, and discredit pitchers because they pitched more innings?
by Realistic on Feb 9, 2009 7:22 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Absolutely
We might as well just give Teddy another 1000 hits and 200 homers as a reward for his service to his country during his prime. And while we’re at it, let’s award him a third Triple Crown.
by RSNexile on Feb 9, 2009 7:25 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Third and fourth Triple Crown.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
by tommy.otm on Feb 9, 2009 8:03 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
This is different.
I am not going to say you can’t gain an advantage by doctoring a ball here and there, or slipping in an at bat here and there with a cork in your barrel. I’m not going to say sign stealing doesn’t occur, or that players haven’t taken “Greenies” since the dawn of time.
I’m saying it has never been as markedly different on a player by player, number by number difference as it has been in the past 20 years. This can not be attributed to anything but steroids and weight training. I really wish it wasn’t the way it is. I really wish there was a way to undo it, but there isn’t. I agree there are things baseball will have to consider. I just don’t see any other way we can ever look at records as valuable again if we don’t make this change.
Steroids have taken the advantage gained to a far higher level than any of the previous cheating methods the sport has ever seen. It truly is a different game. I believe anybody who doesn’t think so is just fooling themselves with wishful thinking.
For the sake of knocking my proposal down, what would be a potential issue baseball couldn’t deal with it if allowed PEDs?
Go Hawks!
by CUNKNNK on Feb 9, 2009 5:08 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
It might be a big problem for MLB...
…if all the players went to prison because they were using drugs that are only available with a prescription. And a prescription for PEDs written for the sake of improving a player’s game is illegal and cause to revoke a doctor’s license.
by RSNexile on Feb 9, 2009 5:13 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
This is a good point.
I almost feel dumb because I totally didn’t even think about the fact they are flat out Illegal Drugs. Kind of puts it into perspective how numb to the use I’ve become. I guess that really makes my argument moot.
Too bad. I love this game. Stats are one of the best parts…and now they are worthless in a historical context.
Go Hawks!
by CUNKNNK on Feb 10, 2009 11:26 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
The dead-ball guys don't have their own separate record book.
Most fans are discerning enough to put stats in context. We still all know names like Tris Speaker and Nap Lajoie, even though they never hit 50 Hrs.
By our standards, Honus Wagner looks pretty tame. 101 career homers? Bonds could do that in a year and a half.
Maybe Wagner would still be a HOF if he put up these numbers today, but he’d be more of a Rod Carew type player. He was basically the Arod of his day (minus the lip gloss and hair dye)(i think).
Manny ain't the only bad man.
by tommy.otm on Feb 9, 2009 8:13 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
PED's are harmful to your health.
To allow them would be implicitly encouraging the use of a substance that will hurt you. I’m all for freedom of choice (I actually would support the legalization of most drugs), but when a person would gain millions of dollars if he were to use these drugs, there really is no choice. Players would be almost forced to use a substance that could permanently harm them. This is not a situation that the league should put their players in.
by BTLove on Feb 9, 2009 9:01 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
hGH doesn't harm your health.
In fact, it improves it. When taken under a doctors supervision, there are a lot of positive benefits. Not all PED’s harm your health.
Tools Whore
Sign Bonds!
by Tyler on Feb 9, 2009 9:29 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Hmm, then why not? i guess.
It makes me think; what is the difference between taking HGH (or whatever) and a tough painkiller. Many NFL players take cortisone shots before every game, shots that they would not be able to play without. How is this not performance enhancing? Really, how are new surgeries not “performance enhancing”? Should we discount Curt Schilling’s courageous “bloody sock” performance because he was benefiting from a technology that was only recently available? Samdy Koufax would not have been able to play with the same injury. How was that surgery not performance enhancing? But then again, steroids just seem wrong. They don’t pass the smell test and sometimes thats all it takes.
by BTLove on Feb 9, 2009 9:40 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Ughh
Tyler,
you don’t know what the f**k you are talking about, and this is starting to get me mad. No reputable doctor would prescribe HGH to anyone who does not have a pituitary problem. It most certainly can be dangerous in high doses (ever heard of acromegly?), while the health benefits are completely debatable in moderate doses. Please don’t spout the crap that wellness spas in FL are pushing.
This is why
Pedro Martinez is the my favorite player. That 150 pound flamethrower must of faced lineups full of juiced players and still beat em.
I think everyone should stop focusing on the cheaters and give major respect to the guys who didnt: Pedro, Schill, Randy Johnson, David Eckstein, Mariano Riveria, David Wells, Glavine, Smoltz, Maddux.
Pretty much if you are fat, a midget and skinny or a string bean and skinny, thats my criteria.
P.S. Clemens, Pettite, A-Rod, Giambi…is Jeter next?
by SoxAcumen on Feb 9, 2009 5:52 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
I'm pretty anti-Jeter
:-)
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Feb 9, 2009 6:39 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
He donates to a company that my mom works for.
I have to cut off the hate at a certain level.
by bdalebs on Feb 9, 2009 6:52 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Same here
Pretty sure Jeter loves men.
"Hey we got a lot in common here... I'm gonna rape you"
by MerryGoByeBye on Feb 9, 2009 8:04 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Aww, man. And I posed for a pic with him.
At least Dr. Jeter’s cool.
by bdalebs on Feb 9, 2009 8:07 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Show me on the doll where he touched you.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
by tommy.otm on Feb 9, 2009 8:14 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
He really liked that water bottle.
He kept taking big swigs during the interview. They should have confiscated it. :)
by bdalebs on Feb 9, 2009 6:53 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
OT, but Obama's on.
He’s cutting into Big Bang Theory. I hope he’s off by 8:30 (HIMYM), and he’d better be off by 9. Fake crisis is better.
by bdalebs on Feb 9, 2009 8:03 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Anytime now...
Couldn’t he have just posted this to his blog? Or done a video chat? Save the media some money and gas?
by bdalebs on Feb 9, 2009 8:34 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
And there's the ARod question.
Get of the stage Mr. President.
by bdalebs on Feb 9, 2009 8:48 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I sure hope our presidents have not been on PED's...
I just watched the interview and am only convinced of one thing: me & ARod wear the same shade of lipgloss: Dior Addict #473.
Well, am also convinced he isnt really taking responsibility he is just saying the right things- buzzwords: it was the culture, I was young, the era of Mitchell, if I were a fan etc.
…whatever…let’s move on… these freakin’ lists -
"You know," Girardi said, shrugging his shoulders, "it didn't work."
( Joe Girardi on pitching to Manny Ramirez with first base open)
by MassGal on Feb 9, 2009 8:04 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Purple lips?
Nah, that’s natural.
I can fix the steroid era:
by bdalebs on Feb 9, 2009 8:06 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
ARod was this close to being a member of the Red Sox.
Boy, it’d be a tough night here if that had come to pass.
by Danno11 on Feb 9, 2009 10:45 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Good thing he never was
because Manny would have been gone and since A-Fraud has been with the Spankees they have ONE playoff series win. Lets see Manny help the Sox win TWO WORLD SERIES TITLES. Manny is underrated and A-FRAUD is over rated.
Baseball is God's sport! All Truth Goes Through Three Stages 1.It is ridiculed 2.It is violently opposed 3.Finally, it is accepted as self-evident. kinesiologist
by E5 on Feb 9, 2009 11:11 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
What's your point?
Rock me, sexy Jesus...
by nuthinboutnuthin on Feb 10, 2009 12:10 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
LOL
Maybe he had roid rage when he slapped at Bronson.
Baseball is God's sport! All Truth Goes Through Three Stages 1.It is ridiculed 2.It is violently opposed 3.Finally, it is accepted as self-evident. kinesiologist
by E5 on Feb 9, 2009 11:09 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
STEROID WORK
kids. If you aren’t sure about it look at Barry Bonds and Alex Rodriguez’s number when they were juicing and when they weren’t.
Baseball is God's sport! All Truth Goes Through Three Stages 1.It is ridiculed 2.It is violently opposed 3.Finally, it is accepted as self-evident. kinesiologist
by E5 on Feb 9, 2009 11:13 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Obviously they work.
But when do you think A-Rod was using? He has been a consistently great player is whole career. There are no true outlier seasons. He did hit a few more homeruns than his average for 2001-2003, but overall he has had better years beforf and after. Barry Bonds also was a truly great player and won multiple MVP’s before 1994. Steroids lengthened his career and also put him in a whole different stratosphere of player, but he was a HOF’er before.
by BTLove on Feb 9, 2009 11:33 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I don't believe he has stopped.
I really don’t. I think since he started in 2001 he probably has been on some sort of PEDs since. He seems like he is lying in the interview when he claims it was only those years.
Ask yourself this. If you started taking them, won a few MVP awards, and became widely regarded as the best player in the game, would you stop? He blames his initial use on the pressures of living up to his contract in Texas. Don’t you think he probably felt the same pressures moving to the Bronx? I don’t buy it. With his $252Milly+ he can buy some very good untraceable stuff. Again, see the article up above in Baseball Prospectus. The stuff is out there and accessible. He has been on it the whole time.
All this stuff playing stupid, “I don’t even know that word” and oh, they “called me to tell me I may or may not have tested positive” and I didn’t bother to check beyond that… Duh. It is still insulting to me on the same level as Rafeal or Big Mac. Funny how two days ago he had no comment and said to talk to the Union, but then all of a sudden now (since he is totally busted) he is just dying to get it off his chest and come clean. Good strategy though, tell a little bit of truth (since you got busted) and it makes everything you are saying look a lot more credible. I’m still not buying it.
They should treat these guys like they do cheaters in other sports if they are going to act like they are getting tough on it. Strip him of his MVP awards…or erase them from the books something Chris Webber-ish.
Go Hawks!
by CUNKNNK on Feb 10, 2009 11:42 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I agree with you on one point
All these people who are at least admitting like Pettite and A-Rod and a lot better then Clemens, Sosa, and even Giambi, but I still think they are lying. Magically all of them only tried it for a couple of years, and then out of good conscious quit, and coincidentally the seem to have only taken steroids in the years around the one they’ve been caught for
by Realistic on Feb 10, 2009 1:40 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Why so green?
"Hey we got a lot in common here... I'm gonna rape you"
by MerryGoByeBye on Feb 10, 2009 1:47 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
HULK ANGRY!!!!
"It's just a tiny little nick, but it hurts when I get champagne in there."
- Jason Bay, on getting spiked scoring the winning run in ALDS Game Four.
by 0157H7 on Feb 10, 2009 1:53 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Just a guess, at least.
I only rec’ed a couple. Someone else did the rest.
Maybe someone’s making a Steroids : Greenies analogy..
"It's just a tiny little nick, but it hurts when I get champagne in there."
- Jason Bay, on getting spiked scoring the winning run in ALDS Game Four.
Haha BOOO!
I always wondered how much the owner could figure out… muahaha.
Well, I'll appreciate for you to keep my zingers outta your mouth!
Just when I thought this thread wasn't rec-worthy; I get to the end...
"You know," Girardi said, shrugging his shoulders, "it didn't work."
( Joe Girardi on pitching to Manny Ramirez with first base open)
lost respect but gained some back
i am going to say one thing… although i am absolutly disgusted with AROD, i did gain back some respect for him. to admitt after all those before him had denied it is a pretty big thing. this shows that he is more mature than the men he used to look up to as a kid. but in contrast with this i do believe that this will forever plague arod. he will no lonjger be considered the best player in baseball because that needle and syringe will cast an ugly shadow over him. this may lead to problems getting in the hall….we well see
Wow.
I know a lot of people are “going green,” but I don’t think this is what they had in mind.
by walkoff baltimore chop on Feb 10, 2009 2:43 PM EST reply actions
REC HERE!!
BECAUSE I FREAKING TOOK THE TIME TO WRITE THIS COMMENT! That’s about the standard for a rec on this thread— :)
Well, I'll appreciate for you to keep my zingers outta your mouth!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The 10 best things about being a Detroit Tigers fan
- Surprise! A’s finally end the Yoenis Cespedes derby with $36 million deal for Cuban star
- The time Whitney Houston sang to Jim Bowden
- Pitchers and catchers! Mariners get early start in Arizona
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
