War Room Lounge v97: Jesus Christ, you're even pedantic with foreplay.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think everyone was juicing in baseball then but the people dumb enough to get caught have no one to blame but themselves for not being in the HOF. Especially if they still won’t even admit to it.
 
I think everyone was juicing in baseball then but the people dumb enough to get caught have no one to blame but themselves for not being in the HOF. Especially if they still won’t even admit to it.

It's such a refreshing breath of fresh air to see someone that hates cheating like I do
Boggles my fucking mind how people support them

I don't know man, I'm kind of skeptic on the value of steroids for baseball players;

I'm a skeptic on the value of steroids for baseball players.
 
Bonds was clearly the best player in the MLB and a HOFer before he started taking steroids.

He started juicing after the 1998 season.

At that point he was a 3 time MVP, 8 time Gold Glove winner and 7 time Silver Slugger.

He was the best player in the game and he saw guys like McGwire and Sosa getting all the media attention and endorsements.

The League wasn't doing jack and/or shit about it. Honestly I don't even blame him. If he hadn't juiced and shown the world just how much of a game changer it can be it may have taken them even longer to crack down.

He should be in the HOF
 
I don't know man, I'm kind of skeptic on the value of steroids for baseball players;

It's huge and not just in the way of getting stronger to hit HRs.

The aid in recovery for pitchers is a game changer
 
Bonds was clearly the best player in the MLB and a HOFer before he started taking steroids.

He started juicing after the 1998 season.

At that point he was a 3 time MVP, 8 time Gold Glove winner and 7 time Silver Slugger.

He was the best player in the game and he saw guys like McGwire and Sosa getting all the media attention and endorsements.

The League wasn't doing jack and/or shit about it. Honestly I don't even blame him. If he hadn't juiced and shown the world just how much of a game changer it can be it may have taken them even longer to crack down.

He should be in the HOF
He was an incredible player and no brainer HOF player before roids. After roids he became the no brainer best player who ever lived. That’s a significant difference.

If you’re of the opinion steroids don’t help players that much or that it was part of that era (and not banned by baseball at that point in time) he should be in. I just can’t get on board with a process that allows voters to speculate and keep players out or in based on their own views on the issue (for example there’s no standard of evidence I’m aware of). I think they need clarity.

Personally I don’t care either way. When I visit the HOF or talk about player history I have my views and his HOF status doesn’t change a damn thing for me.

One more rant, if Bonds is in Clemens is too. He is easily one of the greatest pitchers of all time and you can make the GOAT case for him.
 
Bonds was clearly the best player in the MLB and a HOFer before he started taking steroids.

He started juicing after the 1998 season.

At that point he was a 3 time MVP, 8 time Gold Glove winner and 7 time Silver Slugger.

He was the best player in the game and he saw guys like McGwire and Sosa getting all the media attention and endorsements.

The League wasn't doing jack and/or shit about it. Honestly I don't even blame him. If he hadn't juiced and shown the world just how much of a game changer it can be it may have taken them even longer to crack down.

He should be in the HOF
He still won’t even admit to it though. “I thought it was flaxseed oil.”
 
In terms of political slurs, it's pretty tame, so it's not like it angers me alone. But you are also not claiming I am one. The other two guys are. And they started calling me the term immediately after, and because of, my exchange with JVS where he flipped out about my having said the casual public were reasonable in broadly perceiving Trump as an isolationist and Clinton as the more-hawkish entrenched politician. So....in bad faith.

This is false, as I already established and you already acknowledged (so you're deliberately making a false claim). Your decision to misrepresent my views on the 2016 campaign and defend another poster's misrepresentation of my views (his likely just caused by just not really understanding well) is why I think that you're so invested in your Bernie fandom that you lose touch with reality.

But, no, personally i don't have that much use for those childish group slurs. Heretic pointed out I used "Trumptards" once, but otherwise not my go-to. So you won't see me quoting JVS/Fawlty/etc. and saying "psh, Hillary Shills" because I'm mad at them and don't want to take on their posts.

You keep trying to dishonestly suggest some symmetry here, but you know the positions "Bernie is the best candidate and I hate a very similar one because she wasn't Bernie" and "both candidates are about the same" are not equivalently shillish.
 
@Jack V Savage Roger Clemens not being first ballot HoF and possibly not even eighth is a testament to baseball being full of stupid dickwads.

Or at least the Hall of Fame. Yeah, it just devalues the institution to keep people like Clemens and Bonds out, IMO.

Bonds is of course the worst snub. By far. But I rank Clemens far ahead of McGwire, to the extent that you can compare pitchers to position players. But I’ll defer to Jack on that one

Yes, Clemens was much better and more qualified than McGwire. On pure value, McGwire is over the HOF line IMO, but not by much, though his fame and career HR totals would seem to make him a lock if not for the steroid overreaction (caused by voters misinterpreting the stats).
 
Last edited:
didn't enforce it, didn't test, but was it or was it not against the rules they signed up for? it was.

its cheating.

all that's left is rationalizing.

I don't think there was an explicit rule against it until 2003 or so. I also wonder how prevalent it really was. I'm thinking that maybe something like 10%-15% among active players at any one time at the peak, with a much higher portion that used ever. So I can see holding it against people morally. However, I think the actual value of PEDs to performance is greatly overstated by sportswriters.
 
Chocolate Lab with a fair bit of Bernese in him. Had the most amazing undercoat. He was a biter though, didn't make it. Not sure what kind of dog the neighbor has.
if my supposed best pal made me sleep outside i just might bite a motherfucker too!
 
I don't think there was an explicit rule against it until 2003 or so. I also wonder how prevalent it really was.

Professional athletes...millions of dollars at stake...not explicitly illegal...

I'd imagine it was more than 10-15% trying to get a edge.
 
Professional athletes...millions of dollars at stake...not explicitly illegal...

I'd imagine it was more than 10-15% trying to get a edge.

In 2003 (which was likely after the peak), they did anonymous testing with no penalties and thus no reason for anyone to try to beat it to get a sense of how prevalent PED use was, and the results showed between 5% and 7% were juicing. That's a big factor in my thinking (combined with comments from players--noting that there's a big range of estimates).
 
I don't feel like I can lounge in peace here with all this fighting
 
Calm down, Jumpy.
source.gif
 
Professional athletes...millions of dollars at stake...not explicitly illegal...

I'd imagine it was more than 10-15% trying to get a edge.
It’s like the spy stuff the Pats were doing. Which wasn’t technically illegal until the 07 season.
 
That MLK thread started about as disgustingly as you'd think it would
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top