Originally posted by Don Sicilia:
- What Kent was saying was that these people are looking at baseball's past with rose-colored glasses. He [b]DID NOT say the Babe or Gehrig were on steroids - what he said that no one knows for sure. He's implying that the media should start recognizing the reality that yesterday's players were human and imperfect, just like today's players. [/b]
Kent said that Ruth & others should be included in the steroids talk, why? First of all, we're not going to ever be able to find out. Two, did they even have steroids back then? Three, why do we have to bring up players from the past such as Ruth & Gehrig. What about Nolan Ryan, Hank Aaron, Ty Cobb, etc? Are we going to point the finger at EVERY great baseball player? So if every great player has a gift (such as Michael Jordan), he's automatically on 'roids? To quote someone who said this the other day, "this is modern day McCarthism!" SCREW YOU JEFF KENT!
