Skip to content

Jon Heyman thinks Roger Clemens is a big, fat liar

Aug 29, 2012, 6:10 PM EDT

Roger Clemens Getty Images

CBS Sports’ Jon Heyman doesn’t hold back in his latest column, calling Roger Clemens a liar and a cheat and suggesting that new Astros owner Jim Crane is “in Clemens’ back pocket already.”

Heyman believes that Clemens will pitch for the Astros next month, and he isn’t particularly happy about it, claiming such a move would cost the team its dignity. As for Clemens himself…

In my own personal opinion, Clemens is a steroid and HGH cheat and got off on a perjury charge because he had better lawyers than the government, the jury didn’t like his accuser, or they didn’t want to send him to jail for lying at a hearing they may feel should have never occurred in the first place (or maybe someone combination of all three). But that doesn’t make him innocent. Everyone who’s followed this at all thinks George Mitchell got it right, and Clemens juiced with the worst of ‘em.

Seems spot on to me. Heyman added that he will vote for Clemens for the Hall of Fame because he believes Clemens was a HOFer before he started cheating.

  1. vallewho - Aug 29, 2012 at 6:13 PM

    is this the same guy folks accuse of being in Boras’ pocket? or is it someone else?

    • bloodysock - Aug 29, 2012 at 6:15 PM

      Huh? Clemens has been long represented by Hendricks Sports Management LP and Randy and Alan Hendricks.

      • lazlosother - Aug 29, 2012 at 6:30 PM

        Heyman is in Boras’ pocket, not Clemens. And really, no one cares what Heyman thinks.

      • vallewho - Aug 29, 2012 at 7:08 PM

        “Jon Heyman thinks…”

    • xmatt0926x - Aug 29, 2012 at 7:45 PM

      Between Heyman and the Nats GM, Rizzo, Boras better have some big pockets,.

  2. drmonkeyarmy - Aug 29, 2012 at 6:15 PM

    They should just allow steroid and HGH use at the players risk. Also, they should allow rampant amphetamine and methamphetamine use…again at the health and legal risks of the player.

    • prionogenic - Aug 29, 2012 at 6:33 PM

      What about kids playing little league and high school ball? They should dope as much as they want too? Where would you draw the line of when it’s okay?

      • drmonkeyarmy - Aug 29, 2012 at 6:35 PM

        19 years old or when you turn professional.

      • prionogenic - Aug 29, 2012 at 6:44 PM

        What about the fact that many of these drugs are illegal to possess and use (without specific medical necessity)

      • drmonkeyarmy - Aug 29, 2012 at 6:47 PM

        Like I said, at the players risk. Personally, I think all drugs should be legal. Illegality is not a strong deterrent to drug abuse/use….and this is coming from somebody with a decade clean/sober.

      • paperlions - Aug 29, 2012 at 6:58 PM

        What about the fact that possession of many of these drugs was only criminalized as political publicity stunts and not for any medical or safety reason whatsoever?

      • 18thstreet - Aug 30, 2012 at 9:06 AM

        Thumbs up to Dr. Monkey Army for being clean and sober for a decade. Good luck today. A thousand people you’ll never meet are rooting for you.

    • drmonkeyarmy - Aug 29, 2012 at 7:01 PM

      Much of the public and personal safety concerns associated with drugs has to do with their lack of legality.

      • irishjackmp - Aug 29, 2012 at 8:35 PM

        Drmonkeyarmy,

        To say illegality is not a strong deterrent to drug use is just wrong. I was always a little curious about them but didn’t want to risk the legal ramifications. Maybe they had no bearing on your decision to use them but that is wholly different than saying that holds true for other people.

        Look at marajuana use among teenagers nationally. The percentage of teenagers using it had been on a ten year decline up until a few years ago but then saw a sharp uptick once a few states started approving medical mariauana (source: National Institute of Drug Abuse, 2011). Teens started looking at it as quai-legal and the taboo factor came off for them.

        Mind you, I am taking no position about whether drugs should be legal or not, just that I think you are dead wrong that them being illegal doesn’t act as a deterrent.

      • drmonkeyarmy - Aug 29, 2012 at 9:01 PM

        I’m not talking about casual use. The legality or morality of things doesn’t have much bearing on the decision making of an addict. Besides, under the terms of my rather rudimentary drug legalization plan, they would still be forbidden to those under 20. There is an inherent fallacy in your reasoning…marijuana use was still illegal for the population which saw the rise. There would still be legal ramifications if caught. What you are really saying, which you acknowledge, is that perceptions of the drug changed which may have lead to an increase in use. So really it was a loosening of social mores and not loosening of the laws for the population in question that may have caused an increase in use. I’m not so sure that legalizing crack or heroin would change the social stigma against it. What it would do is provide a safer product and destroy the violence associated with its illicit manufacturing and sale.

      • Kevin S. - Aug 30, 2012 at 7:37 AM

        Irish, take a look at what Portugal’s done and then get back to me.

      • theskinsman - Sep 2, 2012 at 3:28 AM

        monkeyarmy, had to give you a big thumbs up on being clean and sober. This Red Sox fan is happy for you!

  3. timb12 - Aug 29, 2012 at 6:35 PM

    You inject kids with steroids and call it B12. High school coaches have been doing it for years.

  4. mightymike1250 - Aug 29, 2012 at 6:36 PM

    I beg to differ with Heyman. An American citizen is innocent until proven guilty and that has never happened with Clemens. He’s never been proven guilty of anything. Therefore, he is innocent.

    • bigdicktater - Aug 29, 2012 at 6:41 PM

      I think Clemens is a turd, but you are right.

    • paperlions - Aug 29, 2012 at 7:02 PM

      Legally innocent, not innocent innocent.

      As stated above, anyone that followed the proceedings or watch Clemen’s performance knows he lied, he said some fantastical things, couldn’t keep his story straight and contradicted himself on multiple occasions. People don’t like McNamee (nor should they), but of all the men he accused, every single one said everything happened just as he said it did….except for Clemens.

      Did they have sufficient evidence to make legal standards for perjury? No. Is there sufficient evidence to know that he was lying through his teeth? Yep, plenty.

      • anxovies - Aug 30, 2012 at 2:29 PM

        So much for the American jury system. Juries in criminal cases are usually given the instruction that the defendant stands before them as an innocent man and remains so until it is proved to their satisfaction that he or she is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The evidence upon which the jury decision is made is that which the judge decides is reliable and credible. But what the Hell? Let’s just scrap all of that and bring in the tabloids and blogs and decide based upon what we can glean from those sources.

      • paperlions - Aug 30, 2012 at 2:33 PM

        Yeah, because juries are reliable….how many dozens (perhaps now 100s) of men have been let off of death row after evidence was found that clearly demonstrated they were innocent. Juries can only evaluate the evidence presented to them, and often….they aren’t even good at that.

      • bigdicktater - Aug 30, 2012 at 5:21 PM

        If the jury I served on is any indication of what goes on after they’re sequestered, I think I’ll take my chances with a trial by just a judge if I should ever go astray. Several worthless pos types only interested in getting back to their trailer to drink a Bud and/or get another tattoo.

    • irishjackmp - Aug 29, 2012 at 8:24 PM

      Uh, no… he isn’t “innocent”.. he was found “not guilty”. There is a world of difference between “innocent” and “not guilty”

      (and this is coming from a guy who likes Clemens)

      • 18thstreet - Aug 30, 2012 at 9:14 AM

        Just like OJ Simpson never killed Nicole.

        That a jury did not find Clemens guilty of anything does not mean that he did not do it. It means they could not prove it. I know exactly what I had for breakfast today, but I defy any of you (other than my wife) to prove it. That doesn’t mean I didn’t eat breakfast.

  5. historiophiliac - Aug 29, 2012 at 7:01 PM

    Why didn’t someone just retype the headline so I could give it a thumbs up?

  6. historiophiliac - Aug 29, 2012 at 7:02 PM

    Jon Heyman thinks Roger Clemens is a big, fat liar

  7. 32stork - Aug 29, 2012 at 7:24 PM

    Clemens may well be what you say, historio…..But quite frankly, who gives two sh***s what a jock sniffer like Heyman thinks?!

  8. joshfrancis50 - Aug 29, 2012 at 7:47 PM

    He didn’t say Roger Clemens was fat.

  9. xmatt0926x - Aug 29, 2012 at 7:48 PM

    Well at the very least we have to admit that Clemens is a big man. He’s certainly a very fat man. Maybe Heyman is smarter than we all think…

  10. thereisaparty - Aug 29, 2012 at 8:05 PM

    Odd that a national baseball journalist who openly questions Pujols’ age despite no evidence is speaking on dignity.

    And the reasoning behind voting for Clemens is quite strange. Jon Heyman knows when Clemens started using PEDs?

    • Reflex - Aug 29, 2012 at 10:37 PM

      The issue I have is that Clemens fails the character clause without the PED accusation. Mindy McReady. Throwing his wife under the bus on HGH. Etc etc. He’s not a good guy, nor someone anyone wants their kids looking up to.

      Of course whether or not there should be a character clause is another issue. I’m on the fence on that. But for now there is one, and he does not pass it by any measure.

      • Kevin S. - Aug 30, 2012 at 7:40 AM

        This is why Ty Cobb is not in the Hall of Fame, right?

      • 18thstreet - Aug 30, 2012 at 9:16 AM

        That’s why Tom Yawkey’s not in the Hall of Fame. Or Cap Anson.

        Character.

      • Reflex - Aug 30, 2012 at 2:21 PM

        Plenty of us disagree with the inclusion of Ty Cobb, myself included. Just as with other metrics, there are clearly some players in there who do not meet the bar.

  11. sabatimus - Aug 29, 2012 at 8:42 PM

    How long is that limb Heyman had to go out onto to say that? A quarter-inch?

  12. cosanostra71 - Aug 29, 2012 at 9:19 PM

    gee, Clemens always seemed like a real straight shooter to me.

  13. onegamedoesnotaseasonmake - Aug 29, 2012 at 10:33 PM

    who tf is Jon Heyman?

    • cosanostra71 - Aug 29, 2012 at 10:50 PM

      really

      • genericcommenter - Aug 29, 2012 at 11:05 PM

        While I do know who Heyman is, a lot of people just follow the sports and don’t care about the media who seek their own stardom.

  14. stex52 - Aug 29, 2012 at 11:04 PM

    Dignity? The Astros? What planet has Heyman been on this year?

  15. bozosforall - Aug 30, 2012 at 12:16 AM

    David Ortiz is the real big fat liar, Jon Heyman. Outed as having tested positive for PED use, he still continues to deny it. Clemens, by contrast, still has yet to have a positive test result in his lifetime.

  16. chumthumper - Aug 30, 2012 at 11:04 AM

    Apparently, no one remembers Lyle Alzado.

  17. stlouis1baseball - Aug 30, 2012 at 2:41 PM

    I think Jon Heyman is big and fat.

  18. theskinsman - Sep 2, 2012 at 3:35 AM

    Typical knuckle dragging yankee fans, too stupid to know the difference between “not guilty of perjury” and being caught in a MLB PED test.

    Roidger is just another cheat in the endless line of pinstripers who juiced.Nothing new here.

Leave Comment

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

Featured video

Managers get easier path to Cooperstown
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. H. Street (3460)
  2. T. Tulowitzki (3086)
  3. C. Headley (2791)
  4. H. Ramirez (2672)
  5. Y. Puig (2669)
  1. R. Howard (2504)
  2. C. Lee (2466)
  3. B. Belt (2459)
  4. M. Trout (2196)
  5. A. Rios (2147)