I agree but I don't feel that it's necessarily the players who should take all the blame. I'm not trying to defend what they did (they still disgraced the game and it was wrong), but call it peer pressure of whatever you like, the fact of the matter is, players could juice up and NOT be penalized for it. It's like telling a kid in a candy shop to take anything he wants and he won't get into trouble for it. Also, if you look at it from the other side, if this was the case, then the playing field was "level" as ANYONE who chose to, could use steroids and not be penalized.

I couldn't agree with you more. Sure steroids add more power and more confidence to a hitter, but baseball is STILL a hard game and you have to make contact before the steroids "start to kick in" so to speak

The 'roids aren't just for the power, they also help you recover faster from injuries, so say Bonds for example, less time on the shelf = more at bats to hit home runs. And there is no one in here that will say Bonds didn't take some kind of steroid. I'm sorry, you don't go from a 185 pound lead off hitter to a huge clean up hitter.

Ya, and as someone else said, having big muscles has almost NOTHING to do with hitting a baseball. A little extra might help it over the fence, but a pitcher would gain much more from increased muscle than would a batter.

Football players would benefit way more from roids than any baseball player ever would.

You're absolutely right - one party is not completely to blame. It's a no-win situation. Some players juiced up because there is a big monetary incentive with contracts for players with power. Fans like to see scoring, which means home runs. MLB wants fans to attend games and generate revenue for the league. The league, in turn, looked the other way while the players were juicing so much in the 80s and 90s. It's a vicious cycle.

Yes but what really pisses me off is the players are getting stuck with the bill. As you said, the 1994 strike left a very sour taste in many fans mouths and the 1998 home run chase (amongst other things) helped bring fans back to the game. The easiest way to do that? Steroids! Because as you said again, fans like to seeing scoring, they want to see home runs being hit, etc. I'm just really upset that there's only been talk about the players. Players, players, PLAYERS! What about the owners, managers, "higher ups" who looked the other way? What's their punishment? How come we're not talking about the Cardinals staff who "left Mac juice" or the Oakland A's!?

Mac was let juice and continued juicing. But it's true, each side has itself to blame.

Yes. I had a copy of the four cassettes, in which Ritter interviewed many of the old timers who played from the 1900's -20's, but loaned it to a friend. I highly recommend both the book and cassettes.

Therein lies the problem. We as fans, along with the media, cannot "punish" the managers, GMs, etc. The ONLY thing to do is hit MLB where they feel the impact: 1) stop buying the products advertised during baseball games, 2) stop buying MLB merchandise, video games, etc., 3) stop buying MLB Ticket on DirecTv, and 4) stop buying tickets.

Of course, all 4 will never happen. The thing most controllable is stop buying tickets to games.

All of this baseball history talk and references to Ty Cobb reminded me of a story.

My late grandfather grew up with and was very good friends with a catcher for the Indians in the 1920's named Steve O'Neill, who told my father many years ago about a game in which he picked off Cobb on first base.

The next time Cobb came to the plate, he got set in the box with his eyes on the pitcher, and said, "You son of a bitch, you'll never do that again."

O'Neill replied, "You son of a bitch, you'll never step off the base on me again."

O'Neill's overall remarks about Cobb were consistent with those of the old timers who played with and against Cobb as recounted in the Ritter book. He was hateful, spiteful, crude, rude and surly...but the fiercest competitor ever seen.

Cobb is also known for making a fortune by investing heavily in Coca-Cola in the early days of the product's marketing in Georgia.

Klydon

I heard similar things that Cobb was a real a-hole. Did you ever see the movie where Tommy Lee Jones played Cobb? I'm fairly certain it came out after Jones starred in The Fugitive and Men in Black. If so, was it any good?

No, I haven't, goombah. Although I have it on my list, I haven't gotten around to it. I understand the movie was based on the book, Cobb. I guess I should read that some time.

I enjoyed it immensely. Jones really captured the SOB aspects of Cobb's character and Robert Wuhl (who plays the sportswriter "telling" the story) was absolutely wonderful.

I recommend it for any baseball fan.

I'll make a point over the holiday season to see it. I did enjoy Eight Men Out.

The baseball movie that I had a little bit difficulty watching was the Babe with John Goodman. I don't think he did the old Sultan justice, and the movie seemed to me a collection of anecdotes and caricatures loosely strung together.

Very true. It was too much of a caricature to be believable. The same is true of "Pride of the Yankees" (which was a good movie despite its historical inaccuracies). The Babe Ruth movie with William Bendix was laughable as well.

"Cobb" is gritty. It doesn't paint Ty as a god (it rather sheds light on what a true bastard he was) but it DOES point out a side of him that may surprise you.

There's one scene in it thats almost hysterical (when Cobb disrupts a Vegas type show and gets onstage in a drunken moment). Sadly, a lot of his later years were spent in that mode.

Trivia.

Did you know that as a kid, William Bendix was a Yankee batboy, who, at Babe Ruth's request, brought him a dozen hot dogs before the game that turned out to contain food poisoning. Ruth didn't finish the game and spent the night in the hospital.

Thanks for the input, SC. I'll check it out.

COBB is a really good drama. Wuhl is decent, but its Tommy Lee Jones that makes a unredeemable bastard of an a-hole.

But yet, I am certain that Ty Cobb actually bet on baseball games. His personality was such that for him not to do it, is hard to believe.

As for Mark McGwire, I would let him into the HAll of Fame...after Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe Jackson do.

What I hate is, the story that will emerge from the Hall of Fame class elected in January will be McGwire's election or unelection, instead of two guys that definately not only deserve to be in the Baseball Hall of Fame, but were of good character.

Instead of Andro and steroids, we should be celebrating Tony Gwynn, not only the best hitter of the 1990s, but hes in my short list for greatest hitters in baseball history. Certainly I can't be the only who believes that if the 1994 strike hadn't killed that season, he would have broken the .400 mark. Still, a record-tying 8 NL Batting titles? Younger, I made jokes at Gwynn's also-famous weight(makes me wonder if free food was part of his sponsorship contract with DENNY's), but the man still earned 5 Gold Gloves in the outfield.

Nevermind the fact that he helped finance the recent renovation of the baseball stadium for the University of San Diego, Gwynn's alma mater. Besides being the school's current baseball coach, the school named the stadium after Gwynn.

Then there's Cal Ripken Jr. Sure, The Home Run race of 1998 put new life and interest into baseball, but it was the "IronMan"'s consecutive-game-breaking streak of September, 1995 that began the repair of the severly damaged reputation that baseball held.

Though unfortunately at times, that record of his does tend to overshadow his impact on baseball. Two-time American League MVP. AL Rookie of the Year. 1991 All-Star MVP and Home Run Derby Champion, 1 World Series title, and the fact he became a prototype that will influence a new generation of power-hitters who also happened to play short-stop. Certainly, guys like A-Rod, Tejada, etc. have come from his influence.

[quote=ronnierocketAGO]What I hate is, the story that will emerge from the Hall of Fame class elected in January will be McGwire's election or unelection, instead of two guys that definately not only deserve to be in the Baseball Hall of Fame, but were of good character.

While the McGwire issue will get publicity, Gwynn and Ripken will certainly garner a great deal of attention on their own. These two are going to be upper echelon members of the Hall. Ripken redefined the image of the shortstop while Gwynn was the best pure hitter of his generation. Also, both had remained with the same team for their lengthy careers, a rarity in today's game.