2007 Baseball Season is about to start--talk about anything you want

[sandman]

to clarify what is meant by "remarkable improvement" during the 1998 season....

"Clemens was 8-6 with a 3.77 ERA around the time McNamee did the injections in 1998.

He went 12-0 with a 1.77 ERA the rest of the way."

ouch. 

[The Dog]

Clemens repeated denials just makes him seem more and more like Bonds to me.  I used to like him a lot, but this has certainly changed my perception of him. 

[cotis]

My perception hasn't changed at all.

There is no hard evidence that he used them, innocent until proven guility, in my eyes.

I still think he's one of, if not the greatest, RHP of all time.

[Axl4Prez2004]

I was listening to some NY am sports radio the other morning.  They made a great point.  If Roger doesn't fire back with a lawsuit a.s.a.p., it's very likely he's a bit dirty.  Guilty people generally don't sue becuase if they put their hand on that bible and swear under oath...and lie...well then, they're in Barry's position staring down prison time.

My guess?  He denies, denies, denies, and doesn't sue.

That's my guess.

[pilferk]

pilferk - it's tough to prove that something DID NOT happen.

Thanks.  That's rather my point.

this is all he said she said. therefore, there will be no charges brought against him.

Which, of course, you're sure of because you're on the front lines of the federal investigation into this matter, and you know precisely what steps the fed have planned in the situation where Clemens makes an "unfortunate" comment  not reviewed by his attorney (witness Jason Giambi) or turns a poorly worded phrase (witness Andy Pettite's apology).

it doesn't make sense to accuse the media of a "rush to judgement," and then assume that that SAME MEDIA will be forgiving and vote him in.

Sure it does.  Because I understand how fickle the media is.  Whatever sells magazines/drives web traffic TODAY...ya know.  And I also know they're perfectly able, cabable, willing and, hell, likely to change their minds at the drop of a hat.  Again, witness the articles on the Duke Lacross team when the incident first came to light...and fast forward a year or so and read articles from the same authors.  Pretty different content and tone, eh?

and i'll say this AGAIN, i do not care if clemens ever addresses the issue. i'll be happy for him if he is able to prove he didn't do it. so i'm not sure why you accuse ME of "wanting quick answers."

Because that's what you apparently want.  Read your own posts.  In this case, I'm not generalizing, just reading what you're giving me.

but deep down inside you believe he cheated. so i don't understand why you expect NON-FANS to be so understanding of Clemens' approach.   

Not true, and not what I said.  What I said was that, if someone put a gun to my head, and MADE me choose a stance, Iand my life depended on being right, I'd choose "He used".  Not because I believe it, not because I'm sure he did, but because the only thin shred of evidence out there is that he did.  I might not find McNamee to be credible, but if my life depends on it I'll take "not credible" over "absolutely nothing".

But I'm not in that situation.  So I'm able to wait and form an opinion based on more information as it comes to light.  Nothing on this planet is forcing me, the media, or the court of public opinion to rush to judgement.  So I choose not to.  Others can whatever choice they feel comfortable with...but I wont' agree with it.  It seems spurrious to me.

[pilferk]

Clemens repeated denials just makes him seem more and more like Bonds to me.  I used to like him a lot, but this has certainly changed my perception of him. 

So what would you prefer he do?

He's never failed a drug test.

If he really didn't do it, what, beyond denials, is he able to do that would satisfy you he's innocent?

Seriously?

[sandman]

and i'll say this AGAIN, i do not care if clemens ever addresses the issue. i'll be happy for him if he is able to prove he didn't do it. so i'm not sure why you accuse ME of "wanting quick answers."

Because that's what you apparently want.? Read your own posts.? In this case, I'm not generalizing, just reading what you're giving me.

 

wrong. that's what you (as a yankess fan and Clemens defender) ASSUME i want. i have stated my position quite clearly. early in the discussion i said...

i have always blamed MLB, i have ZERO anger about the whole situation, and i don't have much of a problem with players that took 'roids.

one poll indicated that 22% of HOF voters have said that they will not vote for him, with 41% undecided. this for a guy who was essentially guaranteed 100% vote-in.

[pilferk]

wrong. that's what you (as a yankess fan and Clemens defender) ASSUME i want. i have stated my position quite clearly. early in the discussion i said...

i have always blamed MLB, i have ZERO anger about the whole situation, and i don't have much of a problem with players that took 'roids.

First up, my being a Yankees fan has zero to do with it.  You might not believe it, but it's true.  I've taken the same stance with other players accused of wrongdoing (with the exception, maybe, of OJ Simpson and, to some extent, Vick).  I took the same stance with Floyd Landis and his positive test after the Tour de France.  It's the same stance I almost always take: I refuse to rush to judgement and condemn someone without a good amount of evidence.  Sometimes they're guilty (Roger may well be), sometimes not.  I like to wait to form that opinion, since nothing requires me to do so quickly, until I have something more than allegations....in this case allegations by a known rapist, drug pusher, and all around scumbag.

Second, I'm not defending Roger, either.  If it turns out, when all the evidence is in, he's guilty...he deserves whatever MLB offers up to him.  But I will defend his right to respond in the manner, and timeframe, he thinks is best for him, his family, and his legal rights.  And I won't "try and convict him" or grab the pitchforks and torches until I see good reason to.  That has been my point from the get go.

And lastly....while you state your  position, you then continue to demand that he answer the allegations quickly, right now, instantly....because???  I mean, we've addressed all the other reasons...what's left?

one poll indicated that 22% of HOF voters have said that they will not vote for him, with 41% undecided. this for a guy who was essentially guaranteed 100% vote-in.

Yes, today.  Not tomorrow, not 6 months from now, not 5 years from now (which is when it will actually count).  So what?  Are you saying the whiff of impropriety is effecting his public image? Sure it is.  But it doesn't really matter, at this point.  And it won't matter until they're passing out ballots for his HOF election year.  OK, maybe a little sooner than that......but not much. 

If, tomorrow, he provides categorical proof he never used, or files a lawsuit for slander and 2 years down the road wins...what do think the poll will show then?  If, tomorrow, a postive drug test comes out or one of those "shady" pharmacy's provides evidence Roger bought 'roids from them...ditto. 

The jury (that matters) is still out on this one.

Because the media is fickle, and will write one thing today, and complete change tact tomorrow, if it means they'll sell more papers or they can appear to be "right" to the people reading their stuff.  They're also pretty likely to change their mind when the next tidbit of information pops up, proving them wrong.  They go where the wind blows, because that's what the "court of public opinion" wants them to do.

Edit: Sorry, some extensive editing... I hit the post button, the first time, by accident and a little quicker than I intended.

[pilferk]

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3168534

2 things:

1) It certainy LOOKS like they're looking at the situation and possible legal action. 

2) Looks like they'll be answers (in some fashion) on Jan 6th and 7th.

[sandman]

i'm not "demanding" anything. just pointing out what i believe he SHOULD have done. and he's ultimately doing that. unfortunately for him, it may be too late.

if i was advising him, i would have had him do some Q&A immediately.

whatever his goal is in sitting down with 60 minutes, it would have been much more attainable if he had done it right away.

[pilferk]

Since spring training is right around the corner...maybe it's time for the 2008 thread?

Anyway, I'll be "offline" most of the next couple weeks.  First with New Years, then doing some travelling with the family. 

I'll be watching Roger's interview from a MUCH warmer climate.

And I'll be back to discuss all the interesting baseball stuff sometime in the middle of next month!

PLAY BALL!

[tim_m]

I was thinking that as well.

Have a good new year and fun safe trip with the family

[russkwtx]

to clarify what is meant by "remarkable improvement" during the 1998 season....

"Clemens was 8-6 with a 3.77 ERA around the time McNamee did the injections in 1998.

He went 12-0 with a 1.77 ERA the rest of the way."

ouch. 

Maybe his very hot wife started giving him some more frequently.