As a young Tom Glavine and Greg Maddux once pointed out in one of Nike's best commercials, "chicks dig the long ball". However, chicks aren't the only ones who dig the long ball, we as baseball fans dig the long ball as well. It cannot be denied that the home run chase of 1998 propelled Major League Baseball to new levels of popularity. It's almost clear that the Lame Duck commissioner Bud Selig turned a blind eye to the goings on regarding performance enhancing drugs to boost the popularity of baseball. There's something majestic and captivating about the home run, Major League Baseball had to have realized that this was its biggest draw. As a result of this though baseball is now getting loads of negative publicity; perhaps more than ever.
I am all for cleaning up the game. If it takes urine tests, blood tests, lie detector tests, whatever, just get it done. Here's a couple things that I think are wrong though. First of all, what in the world is congress doing involved in this? I hate how the steroid "investigations" are turning into a witch hunt. If you watch the testimonies of McGwire, Sosa, Clemens and Palmeiro (sp) before congress, you can't help but notice that they bear striking similarity to the McCarthy communist trials. That is not right. Second, I hate how superstars are being singled out. Reportedly there are upwards of a hundred players who tested positive in 2003, why haven't all the names been released. I hate how it's only a big deal when the best players do it, while average and mediocre players who used PEDs get to fly under the radar while the big guys take the fall.
As far as I'm concerned there's nothing that can really be "done" at this point. The idea of revoking MVP awards, batting titles and records as a way of showing a firm stance against steroids is ridiculous. Because where does it stop? Should MLB also take back the World Series titles that the Yankees won with Clemens on the team? Should the A's lose their 1989 World Series because of Canseco and McGwire? Should the Giants lose their 2002 National League championship because of Barry Bonds? Absolutely not. Do we give Bonds' MVP awards to the runners up of those years? Or do we just have no MVP? The point is, there is far too much "stuff" to go case by case. Are we going to have no hall of famers from the steroid era? How ridiculous would that be? I think Bonds, A-Rod and Clemens all belong in the hall of fame and they deserve to keep all of the awards they won.
Baseball changes with the times. Let's not forget that ballparks are a lot smaller now than they used to be. How many homers would Hammerin' Hank and the Babe have hit if they played in this era? Let's not forget that after Bob Gibson posted an outrageous 1.12 ERA, baseball decided that the mound should be lowered because pitchers were becoming too dominant. That is a fundamental change in the way the game is played, and yet nobody is saying that we should take away any of Cy Young's wins because he had the unfair advantage of pitching from a higher mound. The game changes, and the players change with the game. If I had a hall of fame vote I would vote in Bonds, Clemens and A-Rod when his time comes.
-Bryce B
-Bryce B
By not taking away their achievements, doesn't that send the message that if you don't get caught while doing it, you're in the clear? I don't see how A-Rod will be allowed to keep his MVP when he admitted to using banned substances the year he earned it.
ReplyDelete