Jump to content

I think they time these steroids stories to coincide with the start of the season...


Frobby

Recommended Posts

...and that bugs the heck out of me. After a long winter, the absolute last thing I want to hear about right now is steroids. But these journalists figure they'll get more readers if they release this stuff just when people are starting to think about baseball. So they ruin the start of the season for me.

Peter Gammons comes on the Mike & Mike radio show for 10 minutes every Friday morning. What I want to hear from him is what teams does he think may make a move this season, and stuff like that. I don't want another rehash of his interview with A-Rod. It's maddening.

Meanwhile, how does football get away with it? Can anyone think these 6'5", 340 pound guys who run the 40 in 4.8 seconds are not on PED's? When was the last time anyone spent more than 60 seconds on a steroids in football story?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and that bugs the heck out of me. After a long winter, the absolute last thing I want to hear about right now is steroids. But these journalists figure they'll get more readers if they release this stuff just when people are starting to think about baseball. So they ruin the start of the season for me.

Peter Gammons comes on the Mike & Mike radio show for 10 minutes every Friday morning. What I want to hear from him is what teams does he think may make a move this season, and stuff like that. I don't want another rehash of his interview with A-Rod. It's maddening.

Between 24-hr cable and the intertubes, journalism has deteriorated into creating urgent superficial attention to pick-a-side conflict and headline-grabbing BS.

Meanwhile, they mostly avoid any reasonable treatment of things that are complicated and important. Sports is just one example.

In general, I fear the consequences of this way of doing business, especially in other domains of what we laughingly call journalism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My mom and dad met when she worked at the defunct News-American & he was beginning a run of more than a quarter-century at The Sun. Though he's been dead more than two decades now, I still vividly remember many nights when he came home and had to vent about the changes for anything but the better sweeping the news business.

I saw it firsthand when I was earning my bachelor's degree in journalism, and the growing emphasis on the bottom line turned me off to the point where I went into another industry.

All you need to do is consider the wars this country's currently involved in, or the economic debacle we're all struggling through to recognize that Shack's fears about the consequences of what passes for journalism these days are already hitting. Sports reporting is simply an unfortunate, but far less serious, symptom of the problem.

(I must point out that there's still a lot of good work being done out there. Like many things, it's the loudest voices that generally have the least to say)

I always laugh remembering the time my dad passed a t-shirt place in Ocean City that had "We Print Anything" on a sample shirt in the window. "I want that one," he told the guy behind the counter, thinking how appropriate it would be to wear it at work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and that bugs the heck out of me. After a long winter, the absolute last thing I want to hear about right now is steroids. But these journalists figure they'll get more readers if they release this stuff just when people are starting to think about baseball. So they ruin the start of the season for me.

Peter Gammons comes on the Mike & Mike radio show for 10 minutes every Friday morning. What I want to hear from him is what teams does he think may make a move this season, and stuff like that. I don't want another rehash of his interview with A-Rod. It's maddening.

Meanwhile, how does football get away with it? Can anyone think these 6'5", 340 pound guys who run the 40 in 4.8 seconds are not on PED's? When was the last time anyone spent more than 60 seconds on a steroids in football story?

Football at least made an effort (though one could argue about how superficial the effort really is) to put in a steroid test program and real penalties at the beginning, while baseball tried to ignore the problem for another decade-plus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Football at least made an effort (though one could argue about how superficial the effort really is) to put in a steroid test program and real penalties at the beginning, while baseball tried to ignore the problem for another decade-plus.

To be fair MLB has wanted to put a testing program in place since 1991... One major difference between football and baseball is that the union in baseball is much more powerful and was deadset against any kind of testing program. While the PR has been awful I don't think it's fair to say that baseball tried to ignore it, they were just powerless to do something about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Football at least made an effort (though one could argue about how superficial the effort really is) to put in a steroid test program and real penalties at the beginning, while baseball tried to ignore the problem for another decade-plus.

You mean like failing a test for PEDs and then being named Defensive Player of the Year? Seems to me there's no real effort or teeth in that policy at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mean like failing a test for PEDs and then being named Defensive Player of the Year? Seems to me there's no real effort or teeth in that policy at all.

You mean failing a test, missing four games and STILL playing at a high-enough level that a national media always on the lookout for steroids (and I think people forget that the Merriman thing got a LOT of play at the time, especially in the "why doesn't anyone care about this...even though the entire world is talking about this now" sense) decided he deserved the award? Burn him :rolleyes:

You think if Alex Rodriguez goes out and wins the triple crown next season he shouldn't get the MVP?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mean failing a test, missing four games and STILL playing at a high-enough level that a national media always on the lookout for steroids (and I think people forget that the Merriman thing got a LOT of play at the time, especially in the "why doesn't anyone care about this...even though the entire world is talking about this now" sense) decided he deserved the award? Burn him :rolleyes:

You think if Alex Rodriguez goes out and wins the triple crown next season he shouldn't get the MVP?

The argument could have been made if people did care about it more that the benefit of the steroids gave him the edge to play at that amazingly high level - well enough to win the award. It's not in any way similar in your ARod analogy considering when he failed his test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The argument could have been made if people did care about it more that the benefit of the steroids gave him the edge to play at that amazingly high level - well enough to win the award. It's not in any way similar in your ARod analogy considering when he failed his test.

Except that he played at that level...AFTER he came back. When he didn't fail any more tests.

And by the way...

Sources tell ESPN's Chris Mortensen that commissioner Roger Goodell and NFL Players Association executive director Gene Upshaw have agreed to ban any player who tests positive for performance-enhancing drugs from playing in the Pro Bowl that same season. The policy would take effect beginning with the 2007 regular season.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sources tell ESPN's Chris Mortensen that commissioner Roger Goodell and NFL Players Association executive director Gene Upshaw have agreed to ban any player who tests positive for performance-enhancing drugs from playing in the Pro Bowl that same season. The policy would take effect beginning with the 2007 regular season.

Oh, well, now that's pretty serious: banning them from playing in an extra game in February that doesn't count for anything.

Talk about laying down the law. I bet that will put an immediate stop to it right away.

Good thing the football players union isn't as strong as the baseball union is, otherwise they'd never, ever get penalties that are *that* tough ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except that he played at that level...AFTER he came back. When he didn't fail any more tests.

Of course, isn't that what would we expect? Steroids aren't something that if you stop taking them today the benefits instantly disappear tomorrow. Isn't it reasonable to assume he was still benefiting from their usage during the 3 months following getting caught?

And by the way...

Ah yes, the Merriman Rule... Good PR move by the NFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, well, now that's pretty serious: banning them from playing in an extra game in February that doesn't count for anything.

Talk about laying down the law. I bet that will put an immediate stop to it right away.

Good thing the football players union isn't as strong as the baseball union is, otherwise they'd never, ever get penalties that are *that* tough ;-)

Or you could read beyond the basic part I posted...

A ban also would have financial implications for some players, because some have Pro Bowl bonuses and base-pay escalators tied to the Pro Bowl that would be negatively affected.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, isn't that what would we expect? Steroids aren't something that if you stop taking them today the benefits instantly disappear tomorrow. Isn't it reasonable to assume he was still benefiting from their usage during the 3 months following getting caught?

It's reasonable.

Ah yes, the Merriman Rule... Good PR move by the NFL.

Like I said, you can question their motives, but at least they are APPEARING to make an effort. Baseball really screwed up on that account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said, you can question their motives, but at least they are APPEARING to make an effort. Baseball really screwed up on that account.

Yup, my contention is that MLB has been completely inept with their PR approach to the steroids. But substantively they did try to address the issue but were thwarted by a powerful union that was deadset against testing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, well, now that's pretty serious: banning them from playing in an extra game in February that doesn't count for anything.

Talk about laying down the law. I bet that will put an immediate stop to it right away.

Good thing the football players union isn't as strong as the baseball union is, otherwise they'd never, ever get penalties that are *that* tough ;-)

Or you could read beyond the basic part I posted...
A ban also would have financial implications for some players, because some have Pro Bowl bonuses and base-pay escalators tied to the Pro Bowl that would be negatively affected.

I'm sure that will absolutely scare the bejesus out of some players who are terrified of losing their $50K pro bowl bonus too.

Man, the NFL sure is tough about this. Too bad about the candy-ass MLB policy that protects baseball players from facing tough penalties like that ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...