756

[mweb]

I believe Waxman was one of the main characters in Congress making a big deal about steroid usage in professional sports. It makes me think that whatever he had from back then must not have been too credible for him not to tout how much of a visionary he was on the subject. Of course that is just rampant speculation on my part. I really have no idea.

I just see it as the media deciding to not go after this angle. Waxman and House said there piece, I'm not sure what else you want them to do.

[geschinger]

I believe Waxman was one of the main characters in Congress making a big deal about steroid usage in professional sports. It makes me think that whatever he had from back then must not have been too credible for him not to tout how much of a visionary he was on the subject. Of course that is just rampant speculation on my part. I really have no idea. If there was really something legitimate w/Waxman's previous work' date=' why do you think he didn't shine a spotlight on it?

[/quote']

I just see it as the media deciding to not go after this angle. Waxman and House said there piece, I'm not sure what else you want them to do.

I watched some of the hearings and don't recall Waxman bringing it up. If he had credible evidence of say Hank Aaron as a user as hinted at in the quote from your previous post and it was credible why do you think he didn't bring it up? Seems out of character for a congressman to forgo the opportunity to have an "I told you so" moment, no?

[geschinger]

Good question. I would allow it, although, I think many would have an issue with it. The reason I say that is I don't think most care that steroids/HGH may harm the players using them, nor do I think most really care much about them being against the law. What people really care about is the "unfair" advantage they give players compared to the supposed clean players of the past and the clean players of the present.

I agree that most don't care as much about the harm players are doing to themselves but rather what happens to kids whom look up to major leaguers an emulate them. I don't know that most people care even about the advantages between players from today and the past. I think people generally just want a clean game however naive that might be. If they know that someone is cheating and they see that particular player do something to beat their team they feel like they were cheated.

[mweb]

I watched some of the hearings and don't recall Waxman bringing it up. If he had credible evidence of say Hank Aaron as a user as hinted at in the quote from your previous post and it was credible why do you think he didn't bring it up? Seems out of character for a congressman to forgo the opportunity to have an "I told you so" moment, no?

He never really said that Aaron was using imo, he said there would be suspicion of Aaron if people knew what was going on with baseball and steroids. What type of credible evidence could one have? It's not like the government or MLB was going after players back then, so there's not going to be a BALCO type of deal, and there won't be a test, so that leaves guys like Tom House. If they don't want to name names, you have no proof. So was he supposed to speculate that Aaron may have used?

Bottomline to me, there's more than enough info out there for the media to pick up this story and run with it, yet they haven't, I find that odd.

[geschinger]

He never really said that Aaron was using imo, he said there would be suspicion of Aaron if people knew what was going on with baseball and steroids. What type of credible evidence could one have? It's not like the government or MLB was going after players back then, so there's not going to be a BALCO type of deal, and there won't be a test, so that leaves guys like Tom House. If they don't want to name names, you have no proof. So was he supposed to speculate that Aaron may have used?

Bottomline to me, there's more than enough info out there for the media to pick up this story and run with it, yet they haven't, I find that odd.

I don't understand... If there is no credible evidence that one could have and the best they could do would be to bring Tom House in front of the committee then what exactly is the media supposed to run with? How can there not be enough to not bring it up in committee but enough for the media to make something out of it?

[mweb]

I agree that most don't care as much about the harm players are doing to themselves but rather what happens to kids whom look up to major leaguers an emulate them. I don't know that most people care even about the advantages between players from today and the past. I think people generally just want a clean game however naive that might be. If they know that someone is cheating and they see that particular player do something to beat their team they feel like they were cheated.

Well if baseball and the govt continued to look the other way when it comes to steroids in baseball, kids wouldn't know that using steroids was a way to emulate them. Yet kids had been using them anyway. I think this angle of the story gets blown of proportion as well. High school and college students generally haven't been using steroids because MLB players have imo. Plus, I really don't think most care much about that when concerning Bonds or Raffy or McGwire.

In these threads about Bonds, many seem to care about the advantages between players from today and the past. It's also been a big angle in the media. I would agree with your statement if we were talking about football or hockey or basketball. However, people really care about the numbers numbers and records of baseball, many feel the numbers of today are tainted, and don't like how the numbers of the clean players are being passed by and made to look less impressive.

[mweb]

I don't understand... If there is no credible evidence that one could have and the best they could do would be to bring Tom House in front of the committee then what exactly is the media supposed to run with? How can there not be enough to not bring it up in committee but enough for the media to make something out of it?

I'm not saying the media should have come out and said Hank Aaron may have used steroids, but you would think the media would make a big deal of a player saying steroids were rampant in the 60's and 70's, a time most considered to be pure.

[66-70-83-??]

Now that I read it closer, I see that it was Waxman that did the hint/hint routine w/o mentioning Aaron's name specifically. Although with what House said, by not naming names he putting the shadow of doubt over all his teammates. There is no reason to name names just to name 'em, but if Hank was indeed a user and is being a hypocrite in his reactions to Bonds then I don't see why he shouldn't speak up.

Read even closer........ it was the "blogger's" commentary mixed in that makes wild assumptions, like he did with the phony "House Implicates Aaron" headline.

Here is what Waxman actually did say-

http://oversight.house.gov/Documents/20050317121006-68561.pdf

No mention of Aaron at all. No mention of any specific player.

In 1973, the year I first ran for Congress, the House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce concluded a year-long investigation that found — and I quote — “drug use exists … in all sports and levels of competition … In some instances, the degree of improper drug use — primarily amphetamines and anabolic steroids — can only be described as alarming.”

Who knows what the report found ?

I have read before that in the 1970's anabolic steroids were still only used primarily by weightlifters, body builders, javelin/shot put athletes, etc.... those who needed the bulk and strength.

They may have only found Amphetamines in baseball and anabolic steroids in weightlifting or football ?

[mweb]

Read even closer........ it was the "blogger's" commentary mixed in that makes wild assumptions, like he did with the phony "House Implicates Aaron" headline.

Here is what Waxman actually did say-

http://oversight.house.gov/Documents/20050317121006-68561.pdf

No mention of Aaron at all. No mention of any specific player.

Who knows what the report found ?

I have read before that anabolic steroids were primarily used by weightlifters, body builders, javelin/shot put athletes, etc.... those who needed the bulk and strength.

They may have only found Amphetamines in baseball and anabolic steroids in weightlifting or football ?

I wasn't saying anyone mentioned Aaron by name.

Did you read what House said? It's pretty clear that steroids were used in baseball at the time unless he's just making things up.

[geschinger]

Well if baseball and the govt continued to look the other way when it comes to steroids in baseball, kids wouldn't know that using steroids was a way to emulate them. Yet kids had been using them anyway. I think this angle of the story gets blown of proportion as well. High school and college students generally haven't been using steroids because MLB players have imo. Plus, I really don't think most care much about that when concerning Bonds or Raffy or McGwire.

Kids aren't stupid. If MLB doesn't in any way ban them or try to stop them then the message is that they must be acceptable. No consequences outside of personal health combined with the rewards of "making it" is going to drive HS and college players to do it. Then when other players see their teammates doing it, they feel like they have to as well to even the playing field. If you don't think MLBers have an impact and don't think people cared about McGwire I'd point out that Andro sales quadrupled after being tied to him.

In these threads about Bonds, many seem to care about the advantages between players from today and the past. It's also been a big angle in the media. I would agree with your statement if we were talking about football or hockey or basketball. However, people really care about the numbers numbers and records of baseball, many feel the numbers of today are tainted, and don't like how the numbers of the clean players are being passed by and made to look less impressive.

This is a baseball forum. While many here care a lot about advantages across eras I'm not sure that is the case for the general public. But sure, when it comes to records people care. I have no doubt that if Brett Favre were a confirmed doper when he goes to break Marino's TD record there would be a whole lot of commentary about how it's tainted.

[geschinger]

I'm not saying the media should have come out and said Hank Aaron may have used steroids, but you would think the media would make a big deal of a player saying steroids were rampant in the 60's and 70's, a time most considered to be pure.

But if there is no evidence to back any of that up, I'm not quite sure what the media was to do.

For example, there are players mentioned in Canseco's book that don't get much attention. I would argue it's because they aren't going to just take his word for it and there isn't any available evidence they've come up w/to verify what Canseco alleges.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that you are implying that the media chose not to pursue it. Isn't it possible that they did pursue it and couldn't get anyone else or anything to confirm House's account? Therefore no story?

[mweb]

Kids aren't stupid. If MLB doesn't in any way ban them or try to stop them then the message is that they must be acceptable. No consequences outside of personal health combined with the rewards of "making it" is going to drive HS and college players to do it. Then when other players see their teammates doing it, they feel like they have to as well to even the playing field. If you don't think MLBers have an impact and don't think people cared about McGwire I'd point out that Andro sales quadrupled after being tied to him.

This is a baseball forum. While many here care a lot about advantages across eras I'm not sure that is the case for the general public. But sure, when it comes to records people care. I have no doubt that if Brett Favre were a confirmed doper when he goes to break Marino's TD record there would be a whole lot of commentary about how it's tainted.

Again, kids were doing plenty of steroids before steroids in baseball became public. I doubt what MLB is doing with steroids has any effect on high school and college kids doing steroids.

Yeah, Andro was legal and people knew he was using. People didn't know players were using steroids, and still don't know who uses/has used for the most part, and that will continue. As will kids doing steroids.

I don't think many non-sports fans care that much about this scandal. If they did, they should focus more on pro wrestling.

Yeah, a lot of people would care about Favre doing steroids, yet the TD record isn't nearly as big of a deal in sports as the HR record is. And we've seen the reaction to football players using steroids, even with Merriman, it wasn't/isn't that big of a story. It would be bigger with Favre though.

[mweb]

But if there is no evidence to back any of that up, I'm not quite sure what the media was to do.

For example, there are players mentioned in Canseco's book that don't get much attention. I would argue it's because they aren't going to just take his word for it and there isn't any available evidence they've come up w/to verify what Canseco alleges.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that you are implying that the media chose not to pursue it. Isn't it possible that they did pursue it and couldn't get anyone else or anything to confirm House's account? Therefore no story?

When Canseco came out with his books, those names were big stories, there was tons of speculation.

It's possible, however, you would think "Tom House alledges that steroids were a big part of baseball in the 60's and 70's" would be mentioned many times and not totally forgotten. And if they did pursue it, wouldn't that story still be worth an Outside The Lines episode and a big part of PTI, Around the Horn, sports talk radio, etc? I don't recall seeing a bunch of quotes or player reactions to what House said, do you?

Based on what House and Waxman said, at the very least, the media shouldn't assume everyone was clean in the 60's and 70's like they currently do.

[66-70-83-??]

I wasn't saying anyone mentioned Aaron by name.

Did you read what House said? It's pretty clear that steroids were used in baseball at the time unless he's just making things up.

Pretty clear ? Not to me.

Why is it "clear" (no pun intended) ?

Just because one guy (Tom House) says so ?

A teammate of his claims he doesn't know where he is coming from.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/05/04/SPGAVCJNUS1.DTL&hw=tom+house&sn=002&sc=638

"In my major-league career, I never heard of steroids and never saw anyone who took them," Grieve said. "At the same time, recreational drugs were readily available, probably more widespread in the '70s than at any other time.

If roids were widespread in MLB, you can bet Bouton (for one) would have mentioned it in Ball Four.

Speaking of Jim, he talks about the greenies of his day vs the roids of today in an interview with THT.

I asked Bouton if he could compare and contrast the use of steroids with that of greenies (amphetamines), and he characterized it this way: greenies are “performance enablers,” while steroids are “performance enhancers.” Greenies, Bouton said, are something players in his day would use to help recover from a hangover, to get back to normal or something approximating it, but they didn’t actually develop muscle. In his view the two drugs aren’t comparable.

he’s pleased that MLB has finally come down hard against steroid use, although Bouton says he wishes they’d gotten serious about it earlier. He blames the Major League Baseball Players Association for resisting steroid testing, for protecting the interests of players who’ve been using steroids over the interests of those who haven’t.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/the-tht-interview-jim-bouton/

Do you have anything but the lone House admission ? I have done google searches. Other than the one House reference that specifically mentions steroids, I can't find any reference linked to baseball earlier than 1985.

[geschinger]

Again, kids were doing plenty of steroids before steroids in baseball became public. I doubt what MLB is doing with steroids has any effect on high school and college kids doing steroids.

MLB's actions certainly didn't help turn people away from steroids. The bashing of the stars might help convince some kids that are naive about 'em to avoid 'em. The explosion of coverage of MLBs problem has resulted in a lot of good things being implemented by states, high school associations, etc...

Yeah, a lot of people would care about Favre doing steroids, yet the TD record isn't nearly as big of a deal in sports as the HR record is. And we've seen the reaction to football players using steroids, even with Merriman, it wasn't/isn't that big of a story. It would be bigger with Favre though.

As I said in the football thread, Merriman is far from being the same kind of big name that Bonds and Raffy are which limits the story somewhat. But even still there was enough hoopla that forced the NFL to do something that not even MLB has been willing to do with the "Merriman rule". I believe MLBers who get caught using steroids are still eligible to be All-Stars.