I normally enjoy listening to sports talk radio and shows like Around the Horn the PTI, but lately I have been greatly turned off by the self-righteous outrage over steroids in baseball. There are so many reasons why this outrage is unfounded that they won't all fit here, but I will post a few:
- Steroids are considered bad in baseball because they are "performance enhancing drugs", not because they are illegal. That would be fine if baseball players didn't already use performance enhancing drugs every day. Ever heard of greenies? They are basically amphetamines that give the players extra energy to perform. How about cortizone? That would be what Curt Schilling had shot into his ankle before his famous bloody sock performance. You know what kind of performance he would have put on without that shot? There wouldn't have been one, because he wouldn't have been able to walk out to the mound, let alone pitch 7+ innings. If that isn't performance enhancing I don't know what is. So until baseball outlaws all performance enhancing drugs, why should steroids be singled out?
- Another steroids argument is what about the records? How are we supposed to compare Babe Ruth to Barry Bonds when Bonds played in the steroid era? Well, let me tell you something, you can't compare the time periods anyways. You know what players did in the off season in the 30's and 40's? They sold insurance or took five years off to go fight World War Two. Now players spend the whole year working out and staying in shape. Who knows what kind of stats the old time players would have put up if they treated baseball as a year round job. Secondly, the advent of the relief pitcher made it impossible to compare eras. In the old days, pitching a complete game was the norm, not an anomaly as it is now. Bob Feller completed 57% of his starts over his career. What does this mean? Ever hear an announcer say that the hitters are hitting a pitcher better the third and fourth time thru the order? Well, now take into account that Babe Ruth got to hit against the same pitcher at least four times in a game a ridiculous amount more than a player today does, who probably averages hitting against three pitchers a game. How many home runs would Bonds have hit if he got to hit four times a game against some of the shitty pitchers that are around now. That change in the nature of pitching alone makes it impossible to compare the two eras, regardless of whether or not steroids are in play.
- Another argument is what about the guys playing right now who didn't use steroids? Well, up until a few weeks ago, A-Rod was championed as the guy who did it the right way. Turns out he didn't, so how do we really know that any of these guys didn't use steroids. As much as I despise him, every prediction Jose Canseco has made has come true, and he said 80% of players were using steroids. Assuming he is right, and he probably is, that seems like a pretty even playing field to me.
- There is such an unspoken double standard with steroids and everything else bad that players do. Daryl Strawberry just came out with a book describing how the 86 Mets were having sex during games, and getting drunk every night. Any outrage over that? Not a peep. Plenty of the old time players who are held on a pedestal were just as big of degenerates as anyone today. Quick story about Ty Cobb: A guy in the crowd with no legs caught a foul ball and Cobb went over and took the ball from him. One of his teammates said to him "Ty, what are you doing? The guy has no legs." You know what his response was? "I don't care if he ain't got no arms either." So this goes to show that there are assholes no matter what era you look at, so you shouldn't judge the character of players from one and not judge those from another.
- Where is the outrage about steroid use in other sports? Remember in 2006 when Shawn Merriman was suspended four games for using steroids? The sports writers were so pissed off at the end of the season that instead of voting him number one for NFL Defensive Player of the Year, they really gave it to him and only voted him number three. Now, I'm a huge fan of Tiger Woods, and I don't think he's ever done steroids, but here is a guy who has gotten much more muscular as his career has progressed; much like a couple of guys named A-Roid and B-Roid. Just curious where are the people questioning whether he gained all those muscles naturally or not, as they would be if he were a baseball player?
- Now let me run a little scenario by all you apoplectic sports writers. Consider there is a magic little pill that if you take it will make you write much better articles than you're currently producing and will propel you onto an ESPN talk show or even a major sports pre-game show. Now consider all your rival sports writers are taking it, that there is no penalty if you get caught taking it, and if you don't take it you are likely to end up covering the local fair for some bi-weekly rag in BFE. Now tell me whether or not you would take that pill. Of course you would, you would be stupid not too.
