Skip to content

MLBPA head: PED users, Pete Rose should be in the Hall of Fame

Apr 11, 2012, 5:00 PM EDT

Major League Baseball Players Association Executive Director Michael Weiner speaks at news conference to announce new collective bargaining agreement in New York

Michael Weiner spoke to the National Press Club today, and among his comments were his views on the Hall of Fame: he thinks Cooperstown “is for the best baseball players that have ever played,” and that’s regardless of their status as PED cheats or gambling cheats for that matter.

He said that PED users should be in, but that their plaques should bear some notation that they used PEDs. He also said he thinks Pete Rose should be in too. He also made a really excellent point: there will probably be executives and at least one commissioner [cough] Bud Selig [cough] inducted into the Hall who engaged in collusion in the 1980s, which Weiner rightly called a “massive conspiracy” against the players. Which it was.

I can’t find any fault here. At bottom, you have to have some consistent standard: everyone in based on their playing merits or no one in. Since we don’t know who used and who didn’t, how about everyone?

  1. braddavery - Apr 11, 2012 at 5:17 PM

    Oh geez. Here we go.

    • nflfollower - Apr 11, 2012 at 5:40 PM

      Well, he’s right. Especially with the Pete Rose thing, give me a break. HOF loses credibility not letting that guy in.

      • CJ - Apr 11, 2012 at 6:19 PM

        sae goes for Shoeless Joe while we’re on the subject

      • brewcrewfan54 - Apr 11, 2012 at 7:31 PM

        If they ever let Rose in I’m fine with it bit the fact remains who knew the punishment for gammbling and kept doing it. I have little sympathy for him.

      • nflfollower - Apr 11, 2012 at 10:35 PM

        Shoeless Joe threw a series. Pete rose bet his own team would cover the spread, which takes nothing away from the competitive spirit of the game, unlike what shoeless Joe did. Comparing the two is apples to oranges when considering the impact their gambling had on outcomes of games.

      • purnellmeagrejr - Apr 13, 2012 at 7:48 AM

        If they would merely make it so they had to attribute a miracle to a prospective inductee I think we’d see a lot of thse arguments disappear.

  2. 1943mrmojorisin1971 - Apr 11, 2012 at 5:21 PM

    “Since we don’t know who used and who didn’t, how about everyone?”

    No better way to say it. It’s pretty clear the Hall of Fame’s holier-than-thou attitude is wearing a lot of people thin. Time for a change.

    • braddavery - Apr 11, 2012 at 5:40 PM

      Isn’t a “hollier-than-thou” attitude kind of the entire POINT of a Hall of Fame. They don’t call it the Hall of Statistical Accomplishments for a reason. If it was, Harold Baines would be in alongside Barry Bonds and Pete Rose.

      • bcopus - Apr 11, 2012 at 5:44 PM

        It shouldn’t be called the Hall of Fame then either, considering Rose’s stature in the baseball world. How about we petition to change the name to Hall of Current Reflection of Moral Superiority (with a little emphasis on statistics).

      • bcopus - Apr 11, 2012 at 5:45 PM

        It shouldn’t be called the Hall of Fame then either, considering Rose’s stature in the baseball world. How about we petition to change the name to Hall of Current Reflection of Moral Superiority (with a little emphasis on statistics).

      • paperlions - Apr 11, 2012 at 5:52 PM

        No, in no way shape or form was did Harold Baines performance based on the stats merit HOF induction.

        What we have now is a combination of the best players, the buddies of the best players, too many executives/owners, and the narrative HOF.

        In the end, it is actually a pretty sad collection that doesn’t do a particularly good job of celebrating the best baseball has had to offer.

  3. dawglb - Apr 11, 2012 at 5:41 PM

    Pete Rose NEVER cheated the game. Pete Rose EARNED every record and accomplishment on the field, with pure, natural skill and work ethic. Placing Pete and these real cheaters in the same article is a disgrace. PETE, not Mark McGuire, not Sammy Sosa, not Barry Bonds should be in the Hall!!!

    • hondoheaven47 - Apr 11, 2012 at 6:13 PM

      I’d pay real money for people to learn how to spell Mark McGwire’s name correctly.

      • schlom - Apr 11, 2012 at 6:20 PM

        Maybe he means Ryan McGuire? http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/mcguiry01.shtml

    • lardin - Apr 11, 2012 at 7:38 PM

      And Rose is remembered in the Musuem as the great player that he was. There exhibits showing his MVP awards and his hit record. There is mention of the Big Red Machine. The Baseball Museum has not white washed Pete Rose out. What he is not is a Hall of FamER. He does not get a bronze plaque, and he he dose not get to write HOF after his name.

      As long as the Museum continues to honor the greats with exhibits and artifacts and not white wash history, I could care less if the writers stand on their moral high horse and not allow the cheaters the ability to write HOF after their names.

      There is a difference between being in the Hall of fame and being a Hall of Famer..

    • bigharold - Apr 11, 2012 at 7:56 PM

      “Pete Rose NEVER cheated the game. …”

      No, but he did break the cardinal rule of baseball concerning gambling, .. the one that is posted in every clubhouse in MLB, .. the one that spells out the punishment for breaking that rule, AND lied about it for well over 20 years.

      I loved Rose when he played but he’s in the position he’s in because of nobody but himself. If the gambling rule can’t be enforced in with such an egregious example as Rose than effectively there is no prohibition on gambling.

    • RickyB - Apr 12, 2012 at 8:22 AM

      “Pure, natural skill and work ethic.” You forgot a heavy dose of greenies …

    • dexterismyhero - Apr 12, 2012 at 11:09 AM

      Yeah he did, and therefore shouldn’t go into the HoF. Idiot.

  4. raysfan1 - Apr 11, 2012 at 6:13 PM

    Anyone who thinks Charlie Hustle never cheated the game of baseball is wearing Rose-colored glasses. Betting on baseball has been the one unpardonable sin in MLB since 1919. Even saying that he only bet on his team to win begs the point of how much effort went to games on which he did not bet, or bet less. It taints the integrity of game results and thus endangers the credibility of the entire sport. For those who at he only bet as a manager, remember–he was a player-manager. Plus I do not have enough belief in him to think he never bet when he played. PED users may have threatened the integrity of stats but there has never been a question of trying there best to win. In other words, I would rather have PED users around than gamblers. That said, I do think he belongs in the HoF. So does Joe Jackson and so do the best of so-called steroid era.

  5. schlom - Apr 11, 2012 at 6:18 PM

    Correct me if I’m wrong but didn’t Rose agree to be place on the ineligible list?

    • CJ - Apr 11, 2012 at 6:23 PM

      what choice did he have? Greg Williams is in the same position now.. either.agree to your punishment and hope that they’ll let you back in later, or disagree and know they’ll never let you back in, ever.

      • koufaxmitzvah - Apr 11, 2012 at 7:20 PM

        Isn’t there proof that Gregg Williams told his players to be violent with vulnerable players? Just like there’s proof that Pete bet on baseball.

        Don’t blame the Game. Pete messed up, knew he messed, and he signed the paper. At that point, he should have known that chances were slim he would see his own induction.

  6. bigharold - Apr 11, 2012 at 6:22 PM

    “He also made a really excellent point: there will probably be executives and at least one commissioner [cough] Bud Selig [cough] inducted into the Hall who engaged in collusion in the 1980s,..”

    Craig that is the opposite of a “really excellent point”. If one of the strongest points you can make is “.. hey the owners were a bunch of cheating SOBs.”, then it merely underscores the fact that you’ve no real argument.

    Moreover, getting into the HOF should be based on ability first and foremost. It should have nothing to do with some kind of cosmic justice, like addressing the owner’s ethical short comings. That being said, I think that PED use shouldn’t automatically block any player from election to the HOF. I think it merely adds another layer of consideration. Another nuance to be looked explored. Now a voter has to do the mental calculus and determine if the player was in fact HOF worthy all things considered. The problem is there are a bunch of old farts, .. both writers that elect and former players that are already in, that are beating the sanctimonious drum. They are doing so because they are, in my opinion, too lazy, stupid or willfully oblivious and are therefore unwilling to consider that this is just n more era in baseball. One that in calm reflection is not really much different from the dead ball era or the era from before people of color were allowed to play in the majors. Or, more relevant, the era from the 50s through just recently when amphetamines were practically institutionalized in baseball. Regardless, using the owners past transgressions as even part of an argument that supports granting access to the HOF for players known to have used PEDs isn’t just a false analogy it’s intellectually bankrupt.

    As for Rose, I think he deserves what he is getting. He clearly shattered and completely disregarded the cardinal rule in baseball concerning gambling. If you can’t enforce that rule in such an egregious and high profile case as Rose’s you might as well not have the rule. Moreover, he not only broke the rule he compounded that by lying through his teeth about it for 20 years. I loved Rose when he played the game because of how hard he played. But, even more important, he was the epitome of an average guy in size and ability but was willing to work hard enough to make himself one of the most note worthy players of his era. His gambling actions got him tossed out of the game and rightfully so. He lied about it from the beginning and didn’t stop lying until just a few years ago. As much as I loved what Rose stood for in his playing days he has nobody to blame for his current predicament but himself. I think he’ll eventually get inducted but I’d be surprised if that happens while he’s alive. Had he fessed up immediately I think he’d be in the HOF already.

  7. dparker713 - Apr 11, 2012 at 6:32 PM

    You can easily have a consistent standard without resorting to your all or nothing standard. Problem is most voters have no standards for really any of their HOF votes.

    And Rose is a completely different animal than anyone else. Punishments for gambling on baseball need not bear any resemblence to any other offense. The integrity of the game is more important than any one person.

  8. thehawg - Apr 11, 2012 at 6:40 PM

    In baseball if your not cheating, your not trying hard enough.

  9. braddavery - Apr 11, 2012 at 6:41 PM

    These arguments are SOOO old. The Hall voters are TOLD how to vote. It’s a very basic and easy to understand guideline. “5. Voting: Voting shall be based upon the player’s record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.” How anyone could read that (straight from the BHOF website) and say that the voters should be voting-in cheaters makes them either A. stupid, B. ignorant or C. delusional.

    • thehawg - Apr 11, 2012 at 6:53 PM

      Everybody is stupid, ignorant or delusional only on different subjects.. Pete Rose got caught gambling that his team would cover the spread.

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Apr 11, 2012 at 7:47 PM

      How anyone could read that (straight from the BHOF website) and say that the voters should be voting-in cheaters makes them either A. stupid, B. ignorant or C. delusional.

      Counterpoint: There are already plenty of cheaters in the HoF, cheaters that the voters knew about and voted them in anyhow.

  10. natstowngreg - Apr 11, 2012 at 6:41 PM

    Jeez Craig, the season just started, baseball is being played, spring is in the air, and you start another pointless debate about the Hall of Fame. That’s why we have December and January.

    • koufaxmitzvah - Apr 11, 2012 at 7:21 PM

      Craig’s doing his job.

      • micker716 - Apr 11, 2012 at 10:02 PM

        No. Craig is pushing his agenda.

      • koufaxmitzvah - Apr 12, 2012 at 7:24 AM

        Ooooh…. Scary word. It’s like, Craig’s a Commie or something.

        He’s reporting baseball information. Because this is a baseball blog.

        But your’e right. That’s so simple. And we all know, that means it’s subversive.

      • stlouis1baseball - Apr 12, 2012 at 12:38 PM

        Sandy…on this one I am going to have to agree with Greg and Mick.
        It has become quite obvious (to me anyway)…that Calcaterra’s primary goal is to write the all drama…all the time (Jerry Springer type) inflammatory articles. Whether it’s his ridculous article (and subsequent comments) on Tori Hunter’s home alarm going off or something in regards to the DH or HOF voting. All drama…all the time.
        His “agenda” appears to be (to me anyway)…all about the clicks, comments and/or number of people clicking, reading and commenting. If I were Silva, Pouliot, Gleeman, etc…I would have to call him out on this stuff and demand he “spread the wealth.”

      • koufaxmitzvah - Apr 12, 2012 at 2:23 PM

        With all due respect, Lou (and I do respect you despite what my personal political outbursts may occasionally scream), I don’t see the “agenda.” Somebody from a labor union called a press conference and gave his personal opinions about the Hall of Fame in terms of Pete Rose and steroids. That, in and of itself, is baseball related. The article was carried by MSNBC, which to my knowledge, owns this website. The wirters of this website, whether through their parent company, ran a blurb. Yes, that blurb was generate hits on the website. All blurbs on a blog are generated to drive hits to the website. This blog, in particular, runs blurbs about baseball, because it’s a baseball blog.

        That’s not an agenda. That’s a job. This is what they do. Of the previous 20 stories, one involves the Hall of Fame and, in particular, this blurb. Folks who don’t want to read this, don’t have to read this. Folks who don’t want to comment, don’t have to comment. I, for one, don’t feel snookered into responding to your comment because you posted a comment directed towards me. I don’t think you have an agenda.

        The Torii Hunter story would not have been a blog post if Torii Hunter didn’t have Twitter. The fact he has a Twitter account means that Torii Hunter is telling a group of interested people what is on his mind. Personally, I don’t get tweets. I don’t follow anyone because it doesn’t interest me. Craig runs a baseball blog. He follows tweets. He did his job by announcing to the HBT community what Torii Hunter had to say. Of the 20 posts surrounding the Tori Hunter story, only the one Torii Hunter story carried the story of Torii Hunter.

        Again, he is doing his job. The blog was not inundated with articles upon articles of previous run-ins Black baseball players have had with cops in America. However, the blog was inundated with various opinions that began with a commenter’s opinion about how Black people make-up the majority of America’s prison populace, and, ergo, it’s cool with that commenter that Torii Hunter had some cops pull their guns on him.

        Did that commenter have an agenda?

        But, hey, the cycle this will go on as long as the blog is here. And not because Craig gets his hits, but because this is human behavior. He writes something. Somebody wonders aloud what’s the real meaning behind it. Somebody else says there is no meaning. Another person chimes in explaining the meaning. Maybe there’s a long retort to that concept and maybe there isn’t. I am sure of this just as sure I am sure that Ryan Braun will be tagged as some cheater by somebody on this blog until we stop hearing about Ryan Braun. Around and around and around it goes. It gonna stop.

        But I’ll tell you something. There are many agendas out in the world. Some are real. Most are not. We just had a Congressman yesterday announce that half the elected Democrats in the House are Commies. Now, whose got the agenda? The Commie Dems? The spouting Repub?

        Just like this post that I have painstakingly written during my downtime at work today (a lot of downtime, but not enough to condense this shit) it might very well mean absolutely nothing.

  11. aceshigh11 - Apr 11, 2012 at 6:56 PM

    Face it, Craig: you’re just jealous because of Weiner’s (comparatively) full head of hair.

    The “partial scalp see-through” look…very chic.

  12. koufaxmitzvah - Apr 11, 2012 at 7:30 PM

    Charlie Hustle will get his day in court as soon as Shoeless Joe does.

    All in all, though, this place is a museum. They’ve got a gift shop of calendars, key chains, and coffee table books.

    A Gary Carter oven mitt would be sweet.

    • stlouis1baseball - Apr 12, 2012 at 4:33 PM

      Hahaha! Wow Sandy. Thanks. And please don’t take my laughing as a sign of disrespect. I sincerely appreciate you taking the time to write that response. Of course…when I first saw how long of a response it was I thought it was written by Gator. LOL!
      Again…no offense. I mean that sincerely. Thanks again for the response.

    • stlouis1baseball - Apr 12, 2012 at 4:37 PM

      One other thing Sandy. Are you trying to tell me the Dems aren’t commie bastards?
      Hahaha! Joking of course. I mean…even Barry has recently admitted the “Buffett Rule” is a gimmick. Yep…from an article in the Washington Post no less. Me…I choose to do my own homework. Left leaning liberals blindly taking the word of CNN, Yahoo, MSNBC, etc.. as the gospel is no different than right leaning conservatives who get all their “information” from fox news. Ignorant sheep (BOTH SIDES). Follow…follow…follow without thought.

      • koufaxmitzvah - Apr 12, 2012 at 5:03 PM

        What’s wrong with the Buffett Rule? The George W Bush tax breaks have been horrendous for our country. And I didn’t get that from an online news source. I got that from lived in Texas and America during GW’s run as political life.

        I’m serious. What’s wrong with the wealthy paying a higher percent in taxes? What’s wrong with trying to better the lives of many by taxing the few? The wealthy will still be comfortable. They will still get their fancy food, and classy cars, and suave suits. (Like that alliteration?) Ryan Howard will still build himself a bigass mansion, and Mittens will continue investing in car elevators and whatnot.

        I’ve been a fan of Buffett since he proclaimed he wanted his children taxed on their inheritance. He doesn’t want his kids to be spoiled. He wants them to have motivation in life rather than spend what they did not earn but through bloodlines on living lives of luxury. There’s nothing wrong with proper motivation.

        But what we’ve got are the few who are fat and their descendents who are spoiled, talking down to a country that has issues which must be dealt with. My previous job had me on the same corner of the Salvation Army. The street isn’t pretty. The people are lost. These are the bottom of the bottom. The stink they leave, and the pestilence they represent, eventually makes it way up to the top.

        My favorite adage is how an army unit is only as strong as its weakest member. The same goes for society.

        Okay. Enough indoctrination of you. I’ve got to shuffle some pens and get out of here early.

    • stlouis1baseball - Apr 13, 2012 at 11:00 AM

      23% of the taxes paid in this Country are paid by the top 1%. That is a fact. Businesses (big and small) create jobs. That is a fact. It is alot easier to replace the dude pushing the broom on the shop floor than it is to replace the dude in the big chair reporting to shareholders. That is a fact. BOTH ARE EQUALLY IMPORTANT. I WILL STATE THAT AGAIN. THE BROOM PUSHER IS NO LESS IMPORTANT THAN THE DUDE IN THE BIG CHAIR. The difference is you can far more easily replace the broom pusher. Just put an add in the paper. Point is…who creates the jobs? The broom pusher or the dude in the big chair reporting to shareholders?
      We have the highest corporate tax rate in the World (thanks to Japan recently lowering theirs). That is sad. Real sad. I think Canada’s is something like 12% – 15%. We are at 35%!
      Buffett Rule: It IS a gimmick Sandy. That is a fact. Even Barry admitted as much.
      As for the inheritence tax…complete bullshit. Buffett already paid taxes on that! Do you not see that? He paid taxes already. So why/how in the hell is the government right to essentially double dip the dude? I don’t want to hear about Buffett saying he agrees to it. I want YOU to tell me how it is “good policy” for Uncle Sam to double dip YOU on monies/property, etc… you may inherent when the taxes have already been paid on the monies/property, by those that willed it to you.
      Back to the Buffett Rule: Huge difference between capital gaines and income. People don’t do their homework. I am not referring to you specifically. Please know that. But I would venture to guess that the mojority of people spouting off about the so-called “Buffett Rule” don’t know their ass from a hole in the ground when it gets down to the “brass tax” of the whole thing.
      Pun intended with the brass tax reference.

      • koufaxmitzvah - Apr 13, 2012 at 11:23 AM

        I hear ya, Lou, I do. But I also see what I see, and it’s simply crazy how our society compares to others. You say we have a high corporate tax rate. We also have the government giving breaks to folks, and folks who save offshore, and corporations and industry who get entitlements from the government– not just Solyndra, but Big MoFo Oil and Corn Syrup (!!).

        We don’t have enough money to aid the ill. The mentally sick roam our streets all day because Reagan cut government aid to institutions in order to beneft…. Whom? Why, the folks who don’t want to pay taxes, that’s who. And so we’ve got crack heads and needle addicts walking the streets making them dangerous and the people more insecure. While those who don’t want to pay taxes, who have offshore accounts, and sit in those Big Chairs you describe, remain in their gated communities and houses on hills.

        I’m not saying money is bad, and that having money makes you a bad person. I am not saying that folks shouldn’t strive to improve their lives. But the way I think stipulates that we invest in our society in order to make society better so that our lives are enriched by the quality of life for those around us all.

        I don’t want my car broken into. I don’t want my kid approached by drug dealers. I don’t want a world filled with folks driving hard in the fast lane, not caring if they pass Go so long as they feel the excitement of what this planet can bring us. I want a world that takes the load off of us all. Mental Institutions are for folks who can’t handle a large society. If they need to be there, that is where they should go, and instead, in an effort to cut taxes, we give them to the streets. Only in America.

        I also don’t think the Inheritance Tax is a double dip. Taxing those inherit means those who get the inheritance are taxed that one time. The money itself is not its own entity. Most importantly, though, by insisting that future generations actually earn their wealth rather than have it passed on to them means that society is actively making its people think of innovation and not get lazy on their asses.

        I look to Israel as an example of this. One of the fastest emerging technology states on the planet. People ask how they can do it by being so small and always in the line of fire. And it’s because the people there are constantly thinking about the future. They need to protect their lives, and better themselves. Israelis invented the cell phone because they needed to communicate with loved ones should a bomb go off at the shopping mall. They are investing heavily in electric cars because they don’t want to have to worry about Arabian oil. They develop apps, and medicine, and water products because they are constantly on the move thinking how can they make things easier and better for the State and the world.

        They are not sitting on their asses as our wealthy people tend to do. They can’t afford to be on permanent vacation. Not if they want to survive the obstacles that are in front of them.

    • stlouis1baseball - Apr 13, 2012 at 11:44 AM

      Great points Sandy (generally speaking). Specifically, with regards to the homeless, down-trodden (sp?) etc… But the wealthy sit on their asses? Who creates jobs?
      Who pays 23% of the taxes in our country right now? The 1%. Again…thats a fact.
      But the inheritance tax absolutely IS a double dip.
      If you own property…you paid taxes on it. If you will that to your offspring, neighbor, friend, whomever…and they have to pay taxes on it…it is (by definition) a double dip. You already paid taxes on it for crying out loud. Property taxes are federally mandated robbery anyway. I own that property…I provide the up-keep. You (Mr. County Highway Department, Road Department, etc…) spend ZERO Dollars maintaining that property. So why am I paying taxes on something that I own and manage? Cause’ again…I provide all up-keep. You are spending no labor, no monies…nothing. So where is the money going? What is the money for? Reimbursement you say? Reimbursement for what? Cause’ agian…I provide all up-keep. By the way…your welcome Mr. Government man for the habitat I provide for all those suffering animals looking for shelter. Joking…but you get my point there. The only way I would even consider taxing an inheritance is if/when the beneficiary sells that property and makes a buck. Then (and maybe then) can I see it as only then does it become income. And please look up our corporate tax rates. Highest in the world (since Japan just lowered theirs). I don’t “say this.” It is a fact. Good debate Sandy.

      • koufaxmitzvah - Apr 13, 2012 at 11:58 AM

        Property taxes in my state pay for the roads, some infrastructure, police/fire/EMT, and public schools. My state also doesn’t have a State tax, so I accept my property tax breakdown. And believe me, it has hurt in the past. One of the reasons why I shut down my previous business is because the property taxes quintupled in 7 years on a location that I leased because my efforts to change a crack corner into a viable job creating entity.

        As for the wealthy who sit on their asses… I’ve just about seen that in most every job I’ve ever held. Of course, this doesn’t make it universal, and I guess these folks can show me how much work they really do. Right now I work with a sales team, and while they are on the phones a lot wheeling and dealing a number of widgets and whatnots, they aren’t out on the street building houses and roads. Talk to a construction worker (I am not one, but have had friends who are) and see what they do every day on properties paid for by folks who sit at a desk all day. Again, I’m not knocking it, but the man building the home makes about 1/4 of what the homeowner pulls down. That’s part of the complexity in our society.

        Comfort, to me, is not being spoiled. It’s peace of mind.

    • stlouis1baseball - Apr 13, 2012 at 12:17 PM

      You didn’t answer my question. If I am providing the up-keep on my property…why am I paying taxes on it? The Gov’t isn’t forking over one red cent on that property. As for roads…we have a wheel tax that is required to be paid for every vehicle. This money goes directly to the roads (both new, existing and infrastructure)…so that argument doesn’t apply here.
      Your take on the Sales team and Homebuyers floors me.
      Let me ask you…what is the first step in securing that order? Answer = The Sale.
      If that Salesman isn’t “wheeling and dealing” you have no product to engineer, produce, package, ship, etc… If the sale doesn’t happen first…there isn’t a floor to sweep or restrooms to clean.
      If that Homeowner doesn’t first purchase that house the Construction Worker doesn’t have a house to build Sandy. I am in the Construction business. I have two buddies who own Electrical Companies. Believe me…everyone benefits from that house being purchased. And other than the HOD Carriers…I don’t know ONE Contruction worker who doesn’t make good money.

  13. scatterbrian - Apr 11, 2012 at 8:17 PM

    The worst part about not having Rose or McGwire or whoever in the Hall of Fame is it forces parents to talk to their kids about things like sportsmanship and character and integrity. Darn.

  14. jwbiii - Apr 11, 2012 at 11:32 PM

    [blockquote]Rose declines Hall of Fame induction[/blockquote]

    http://www.iol.co.za/tonight/music/rose-declines-hall-of-fame-induction-1.1274112

    End of story.

  15. chumthumper - Apr 12, 2012 at 10:11 AM

    Let’s face it. The commish and owners tacitly allowed PEDs, etc. into the game simply because they wanted butts in the seats and $$$ in their pockets. Then when the crap hit the fan, they cried indignant outrage.

    • stlouis1baseball - Apr 12, 2012 at 12:44 PM

      Absolutely Thumper. After the strike people stayed away in droves. It was primarily Mig Mac and Sammy’s home run dual that started to move the turnstiles. To the point of the turnstils seemingly being in perpetual motion. Hell…there was even an investigation done to determine why the balls were flying out of the parks so much. An investigation into the acutal Manufacturing facility (I believe they are made in Puerto Rico)…to ensure the balls were being manufacturered per specificaitons. Balls were traveling 400’+ feet with regularity. Dudes were getting the size of houses. What did Bud do during all this? Turned his head. Why? Because the turnstiles were moving. When it became P.C. to take a stance…he started waiving his fingers and slapping wrists. Phuqing hypocrites.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Final take away from World Series
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. H. Pence (2243)
  2. M. Morse (2217)
  3. J. Panik (2124)
  4. Y. Cespedes (2111)
  5. M. Moustakas (2040)