Least surprising news ever

So, Sammy Sosa tested positive back in 2003 along with Alex Rodriguez. The news of this comes out only a few short weeks after Sosa went public, lobbying for his place in the Hall of Fame.

In an interview with ESPN Deportes at the beginning of June, Sosa said,

"Everything I achieved, I did it thanks to my perseverance, which is why I never had any long, difficult moments [as a baseball player]. If you have a bad day in baseball, and start thinking about it, you will have 10 more," Sosa said in his first public comments in months.

"I will calmly wait for my induction to the Baseball Hall of Fame. Don't I have the numbers to be inducted?"

...

"I always played with love and responsibility, and I assure you that I will not answer nor listen to rumors," Sosa said. "If anything ugly comes up in the future, we will confront it immediately, but with all our strength, because I will not allow anybody to tarnish what I did in the field."

Coincidence that his name gets leaked three weeks after he begins to lobby for the Hall? I think not.

The only two places this could be coming from are either the Union, or the Justice Department which forced baseball to turn over the list. My guess is that it's being leaked by someone in Justice.

At this point he can pretty much kiss the Hall goodbye as he definitively has joined the ranks of McGwire, Palmeiro, Clemens, and A-Rod as players whose artificially inflated numbers are being viewed with either increased or overwhelming skepticism.

Typically, I'm not big on comparing players from different eras in baseball, but this is different. Everything is skewed from about 1990ish on. Some players used PEDs, some didn't. But it should change how players are viewed, and this most recent era almost demands we consider how these players would have done in earlier eras. And I don't think they would hold up well.

We have lived through an era that should make anyone who knows the history of the game appreciate those who came before much more. Appreciate Roger Maris and Hank Aaron, Ted Williams and Babe Ruth all the more for knowing they did it not only without things like steroids and HGh, but without the diluted pitching that sluggers have faced for the last two decades.

Does anyone really believe that without steroids and facing the likes of Sandy Koufax, or Tom Seaver, or Don Drysdale in their primes that Jason Giambi would have anywhere near the same number of career homers? Barry Bonds? Alex Rodriguez?

We live in an era where pitchers average only about six innings per outing, in spite of the fact that they get an extra day of rest from the five man rotation as opposed to the four man rotation that was popular 40 and 50 years ago. As recently as the 1970's and early 80's a horse was a pitcher who threw 250 to 300 innings in a season. Now if a pitcher hits 200 innings he's the horse of a rotation.

At one point the Orioles had four 20 game winners in one season. There were four in all of baseball last season. That staff (1971 Orioles) also accounted for 70 complete games. Last season it took 21 pitchers to combine for that many complete games.

On a lighter note -

David Ortiz is actually hitting over .300 for the month of June and has raised his batting average by 22 points. I'm still a little skeptical given the fact that he has always hit the Yankees well for his career and he's currently facing the Marlins after facing the Tigers and Rangers. The only one of those teams with decent pitching is Detroit. Otherwise, the Yankees are 26th, the Marlins 22nd, and the Rangers are 17th in team ERA.

I'm not saying that I'm not happy about this streak, I'm just saying that I'm hoping it's not just a streak. I will feel a whole lot better if Ortiz can get that batting average up to around .240, particularly given the fact that I sincerely believe that Varitek will go into his usual cool down mode as summer heats up.

It is possible that facing the weak pitching is exactly what Big Papi needs to break him out of his funk, but give it to the All-Star Break before you get too excited. In other words, be happy for now, but if he takes a hard left turn back to where he was, don't be surprised. I'm hoping he doesn't - call it cautious optimism.

As for the potential of the Sox going to a 6 man rotation - it's something I think might help Daisuke Matsuzaka given that he pitched in a 6 man rotation in Japan. Otherwise, I don't know how beneficial this will be to the rest of the staff given the fact that it looks like everyone else has begun to hit a rhythm.

Final note - The Australian football team on which I play, the Baltimore/Washington Eagles kicked off their season with a 105-15 win over the Columbus (OH) Jackaroos. This upcoming weekend is an off-week before we head on up to New York to play the Magpies in Yonkers.

Losing the game of chicken...

or Beware the Idiots of March...

A little translation of professional athlete speak - I want the team to show it's committed to me. Translation - I want to see more money in a new contract.

From New York Newsday -

ESPN's Chris Mortensen reported on the night of March 15, the day after Josh McDaniels met with [Jay] Cutler and his agent, Bus Cook, that the pair requested a trade. Which the Broncos verified.

"The Denver Broncos confirm that Jay Cutler has requested a trade," a team spokesman told the AP March 16.

Cutler, during what seemed an unambiguous interview, told Mortensen March 15, "Really, it's best for me to move on."

From a Fox report -

"I was surprised they decided to trade me this soon," Cutler said. "I didn't want to get traded. This wasn't me. (The Broncos) had been going back and forth saying things, wanting me to be their quarterback and then they didn't."

"I really didn't want this. I love Denver. I really like my teammates. I didn't want it to get this far."

If Jay Cutler has any credibility in any locker room anywhere ever again, I will be sorely disappointed in his future teammates. So...was he bluffing in order to get a new contract? Did he think that by showing up his new coach and GM that he was showing his Broncos teammates his sterling leadership qualities? Is this guy really this big an idiot?

Some really quick hits...

Good win for the Celtics against a Bobcats team that's beginning to peak at the right time for a playoff run.

Not really surprised that Clay Buchholz was sent to Pawtucket to start the season, but I will be surprised if we don't see him in Fenway again sometime this season.

Tommy Lasorda just doesn't get it. In his defense of nephew Mike Piazza (related to the recent allegations of steroid use), Lasorda said that Piazza busted his ass in the weight room. That was part of his reasoning that his nephew couldn't have been using. I guess he doesn't know that steroids don't magically give one muscles, that you have to spend time in the weight room or you just get fat. He also uses the idea that Piazza is church-going in his defense of his nephew.

Let's get something straight here - just because someone is inherently a good person, or regularly attends church, that doesn't exempt them from doing something bad or stupid. Andy Pettitte, by all accounts, is a very religious guy, and a good guy in the locker room. Nailed for HGH. Then of course history is littered with religious people that just were not good human beings - take Tomás de Torquemada or Hitler (by all accounts, extremely religious). And please don't think I'm comparing Piazza to Hitler or the grand inquisitor of the Spanish Inquisition - I'm only trying to point out that religiousness is no defense and no guarantee of a person being good.

It looks like Donte Stallworth is getting charged by Miami authorities. It sounds like it's what I previously called. This should surprise no one, and should Stallworth work out a deal that avoids jail time, he's still going to miss games due to whatever suspension is handed down for his lapse in judgement.

Tidbits

Evidently pharmacists in the Dominican are disputing A-Rod's claim that the steroid he used can be obtained over the counter in the DR. Additionally, according to a New York Daily News report, two reporters sent to the DR pretty much were able to obtain Durabolin immediately after getting off their flight.

The reporters went into the first pharmacy, were asked for a first name, and then spent about $20 to get their steroids.

Considering reports regarding a steroid trail from Mexico into San Diego (in relation to the Chargers), I'm surprised, given MLB's efforts over the last two seasons, that baseball's franchises continue to send players for winter league games to Mexico, or any of the Latino countries where obtaining these drugs is so easy.

Hopefully David Ortiz is being completely straight regarding banned trainer Angel Presinal. As much as I agree with Dave over at the Coffin Corner that Ortiz's call for a year ban on users makes it appear that he's likely to be clean, I disagree that his stats have stayed on an even keel throughout his career.

Everyone is quick to point out that he became a monster once in Boston and he was a full time player, but he did have two seasons with the Twins in which he played in at least 125 games and logged at least 400 at bats. For those two seasons Ortiz averaged 15 home runs and 69 RBI's. Over a 162 game season that projects to roughly 20 homers and 85 RBI's.

While the wrist injury he had last season was reminiscent of the one that Nomar had - one of the connective tissue, and an odd one at that - I don't believe that Big Papi has been juicing, but anecdotal evidence isn't good. He's linked with a trainer who's a known supplier (and should know better than to train where this man works - it's not like he doesn't have the money to have the option of training elsewhere), he had a freak injury of the connective tissue - the tendon sheath in his wrist - which is the sort of injury that could be indicative of steroid use, and his production spiked when he moved to Boston with his homerun total spiking by 55 percent when he moved from the Twins to the Sox, and more than doubling his final Minnesota HR total within two seasons, and knocking in 64 more runs within two years of his departure from the Metrodome.

The flip side - Ortiz was 26 in his final season with the Twins, just beginning to enter what is universally held as the prime of his career, the time when most players stats would spike. If you account for a 25 percent increase just based on entering the prime of his career, he would have hit about 25 homers and knock in about 93 runs. A look at Ortiz's stats also shows that he did have, on average a 35 to 40 percent increase in at bats - that would account for up to an additional 8 homers and 17 RBI's bringing him into the 30's and about 110 respectively, and I haven't even figured in the Fenway factor. So, no, I do think he got there naturally - but he really should be aware of appearances of impropriety in relation to the juicing issue.

Given that Kevin Garnett's injury is only a muscle strain and he should be back with about 18 games left in the season, i don't think Garnett's injury is necessarily a bad thing for the Celtics. If the team wins half the games he misses, that means he comes back and the C's have lost four games. At worst that will drop them to the three seed in the East. I don't think going .500 over the next eight games is an unrealistic expectation, and I don't think being the three seed is a bad thing for them.

Based on current standings, even if they lost the four games, they could only fall to the third seed if Orlando goes 7-1 over that same stretch - so it's more likely that the worst that would happen is that they end up in the second seed by no more than two games with 18 to go and a rested Kevin Garnett in the line-up.

That's not necessarily a bad thing.

Steroids - it's a three ring circus

Never mind the idiot fans that are actually coming to Alex Rodriguez's defense in the Winstrol-Stanozolol Circus - and there are some (all you need do is look at the comments at the end of the article here) - we are now seeing three distinct groups forming in Baseball's biggest side-show.

The Steroid Users and their Apologists - taking center ring, step right up to see records broken and excuses made. Watch false apologies (so so sorry [I got caught]. Won't do it again), crocodile tears, and the support and justification of teammates cornered into shows of such. Witness team brain trusts cringe as they realize they're awarded monstrous contracts under false pretenses, and scramble in conjunction with agents in spin control.

The second ring - Players filled with righteous and, sometimes, justified indignation when going about the game without taking short-cuts. Players not hiding behind the union; players calling for stricter testing and penalties, players that aren't making excuses, calling it "the culture," or justifying use. Yes, there are some players in this group that seem to move to the center ring, but that's all part of the show now, isn't it?

The Fourth Estate is the Third Ring - The reporters reporting the news have become the news. Selena Roberts, the reporter from Sports Illustrated who broke the news has become part of the current news cycle for both breaking the story, and because of Alex Rodriguez's attack on her during his interview with Peter Gammons. During the Gammons interview in which A-Rod copped to his steroid use, the superstar with the quarter-billion dollar talent and the ten-cent head accused Roberts of stalking him and of having multiple run-ins with the police.

Unfortunately for A-Rod, there's not a shred of evidence to support his claims. So much so, that Rodriguez has already privately contacted Roberts and apologized.

My own personal opinion of A-Rod's apology - were I the reporter, it wouldn't be enough. I would want a public retraction and apology. Until that happened, I would have lawyers begin proceedings against Rodriguez, and wouldn't back off until that public apology happened.

By Request

Colts fan (don't hold it against her, guys) and fellow leatherhead Teresa put forth the following response to my reaction to the Alex Rodriguez steroids story -

What is so sad is these people don't need those drugs to be rock stars. They are amazing on their own. Is the pressure to do more and more? It is peer pressure?

I don't think there's any one answer as to why these different athletes feel it's necessary to juice. There might be one right answer for a given player, but there are a variety of reasons that these men inject, rub, and otherwise administer illegal and banned substances.

For some, I think it's about hanging around for a few more years - Rodney Harrison comes to mind. For others, bottom of the roster players, it's about hanging around, period.

For every player like Harrison or the bottom end player trying to extend their time in the pros, there are the guys like Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds and Alex Rodriguez for whom being at the top of the game wasn't good enough. There's a special sort of narcissism that goes into that - one that I understand, but I just don't get. Okay, well, Clemens didn't sustain it over a long period of time like Bonds had done, not until he had been juicing.

Being at the top of their games wasn't good enough. They had to shatter records, and they will find ways, just like their apologists, to rationalize the use of the banned supplements - it doesn't affect the ability to pick up the ball in the strike zone (in spite of the fact that studies suggest that HGH can enhance eye-sight), it doesn't affect the inherent ability to turn on a 95 mile per hour fast ball (in spite of the fact that evidence has shown that steroids can impact and help build the fast twitch muscle that allows a hitter to turn on that ball), it doesn't help (then why do it, and why do these players almost always show a spike in their numbers in the years they admit to having started doping?).

When I was in high school, I knew of at least one player on the football team doing steroids. I didn't get it. For me, part of sport was pushing my body to the limit, see what I was truly capable of. I qualified for the New York State Meet in track and field, I've finished a marathon, I've played Australian football for ten seasons, played street hockey for eight. I've never missed a game due to injury (although I probably should have - I've been known to play games with an air-cast on my ankle for disconnected tendons...it sucked), and never taken any sort of supplement to do so. It defeats the purpose, in my opinion.

In their heads, it appears to be a means to an end. Better stats, better contracts, better remembered when they're gone. It's not a short-cut, legality be damned.

But why is there a mentality that juicing isn't a short-cut? Because a person who takes steroids and doesn't put the physical labor into getting into better shape just gets fat. Best as I can figure is they believe that because they are still doing physical work that it's not a short cut.

My personal belief is that these guys, while they know it's against the rules, don't believe they're actually doing anything wrong. And I think that's really the bottom line.

Other thoughts -

Brett Favre claims that he's actually retired...again. I'll believe it sometime next fall if and when he's not under center taking snaps.

There has been a lot shaken-up in the NFL this off-season, and I will address that soon.

Da Juice...again

To be perfectly honest, I, for one, am getting tired of writing about the crap-tastic world of juicing athletes, but given the news cycle regarding Alex Rodriguez, it looks like I kind of have to.

Am I surprised by the recent revelations? Not in the least. Is there anyone whose name would surprise me at this point? No.

Sure, there are players that I hope haven't been on anything, but I'm convinced at this point that well over half the players from the so-called steroid era were juicing in one way or another. Considering that the only source for the Mitchell Report was a clubhouse attendant from New york, and the preponderance of names contained in the report were East Coast guys, I have to wonder just how many names would have been in the report had they found the supplier in Atlanta? San Diego? Arlington? Chicago?

There is no schadenfreude in this. A-Rod is just the explanation point on what isn't really even the end of an era. There's a misconception that juicers are going to go away. A-Rod has any number of issues which are fair game, but for anyone who has defended Rodney Harrison, or Nick Kaczur, or any number of other NFL players, to attack Rodriguez on this is not just disingenuous, it's hypocritical.

The NFL makes the idea that the juicing era in baseball a lie. And let's call it what it is - the Juicing Era, not steroid.

The designer drug makers will always be a step ahead of those enforcing the league's rules. The sins are out of Pandora's Box, and there's not putting them back in.

Maybe there will be fewer juicing, but the era isn't over. It's just beginning, the tip of the iceberg, and more is bound to come out.

Taking five between freelance

I'm in the middle of an editing assignment after cranking through deadlines for an article on an upcoming blues festival and one for my usual gig with the Mid-Atlantic Brewing News, both of which were due on Tuesday. Right now I'm editing a press release for a DC area financial firm, and I needed five or ten minutes to decompress from the financial terms and occasional government speak that permeate the piece I'm working on.

So, just some quick observations -

• Were the Twins pitchers aware that they were not throwing batting practice? Sox hitters, overall for that final game of the series, batted .500. The only Sox player without a hit was rookie Jeff Bailey who was pinch ran and took over in left field (take Bailey's one at bat out of the equation and the Sox hit .511 and the next worst in-game average is Brandon Moss' 1 for 5, .200 performance). At the other end of the spectrum was Jacoby Ellsbury who hit a gaudy .667, leading a contingent of players that include Kevin Youkilis, Manny Ramirez (way to bust that slump), and Sean Casey, who hit at least .600 for the game.
• Making the 23-hit assault even more amazing for the Sox is the fact that Twins pitchers walked only two during the game and the Sox only left seven men on base. The Twins, on the other hand, left 12 men on base.
• If someone had told be before this homestand that both Jon Lester and Josh Beckett were going to give up five earned a piece, I would have said the Sox were going to lose at least one of those.
• The Red Sox now stand only two games behind the Rays. With the Rays on the road tonight, and emulating the Sox "great at home, suck on the road model," there's every chance that the Sox will be starting their series against the Orioles only one-and-a-half back.
• Speaking of the Rays, their final game of the two-game set against the Yankees in the Bronx was Mustache Day, with the Bombers giving away porn-staches to their patrons in honor of their best offensive force - Jason Giambi. I can't help wondering if with the 'staches, they gave away little vials marked, "steroids."
• On an off-the field note, letters to writers like the majority of these tend to sadden me, and sometimes anger me. A quick background - Yahoo! writer Tim Brown wrote a piece on Kim Ng and her chances at a GM position. Some of his responses were like this -

Of course, she played shortstop all those years in Montreal and the outfield for the Marlins, sure she’s qualified. As soon as she can play in AA she can make those decisions. She has just as much an idea as I do what it’s like to play in majors. Please, as a Diamondbacks fan, I hope the Dodgers give her the job next week!

Scott
Los Angeles

As a Diamondbacks fan, you probably also know your GM (Josh Byrnes, who is one of the bright and creative minds in the business) didn’t play professional baseball.

For my money, I don't give a rats ass if my team's GM is male, female, a multi-sexual alien from the planet Playtex, a former hooker, or a handicapped, left-handed monkey with libertarian leanings and communist parents. Hell, I'll even live with one whose last name is Steinbrenner, as long as they can evaluate talent and put together a winning team. Anyone that puts any weight on any other factor than the concept, "can the person put together a winning team," is a moron.

And the idea that they had to play on a professional level like this idiot intimated, is beyond the pale. Theo Epstein, Brian Cashman, Bill Belichick, Scott Pioli, Bill Parcells, Jerry Jones, Bill Polian, and Rays GM Andrew Friedman never got paid to play their respective sports professionally. And that's just a small segment of talent evaluators that never drew a paycheck to play the sports they're involved in. Then there's the flipside - Kevin McHale, Isiah Thomas, Matt Millen - all Hall-Of-Fame players, with only McHale coming close to putting together a contender as GM's (and he's put together six of thirteen seasons of teams that went .500 or worse).

Dirty little secrets

I have become...shall we say...quite cynical in regards to professional athletes.

It started long before now, but it's been coming to a head.

I've spent a lot of keystrokes on this recently.

Cheating, drugs, the sports version of Enzyte...unnatural athlete enhancement. Call for details. Side effects could include acne, shrinkage, and impotence. Long term effects could include cancer.

I have gotten to the point where the benefit of the doubt is no longer afforded.

Hank Steinbrenner can cry all he wants about what he perceives as a drug problem in football, and baseball being picked on. He will get sympathy from precious few out there. He deserves none.

Yes, there's still a performance enhancer problem in football. The difference is that the NFL has at least made an effort for over a decade and a half, or the appearance of an effort. Baseball had to be pushed into it. And the Player's Union is still being dragged into compliance.

Don't believe the last statement, consider that Donald Fehr told his constituents not to talk to George Mitchell. To stonewall the investigation.

What's the dirty little secret of professional sports?

The dirty little secret is that we're watching the games, races, matches and what have you, being contested on an even playing field...in a really twisted way.

While I'm sure that there are many professional athletes that are clean, I have to believe, in light of the numbers in the Mitchell Report, that there's a majority of players out there on the juice. I won't even get into team-related things like Spygate, salary cap violations, allegations of teams in baseball setting up cameras over the centerfield wall in order to steal signs, and so on.

As for those numbers in the Mitchell Report...as I recently noted to someone, there were over 80 players implicated in the former senator's report. Better than three teams' worth of players. That's based largely on the testimony of two dealers/informants out of New York City. Mitchell himself said that his work was not definitive.

It makes me wonder, if the investigators were able to link 80 names based on two guys out of New York, just how many they would have been able to name had they been able to identify the suppliers in Los Angeles, Chicago, Detroit, Seattle, Philadelphia, and any number of other places. Fifty percent of major leaguers? Seventy?

Everyone talks about Hank Aaron's home run record, but how many records are tainted by PED use? We all now know that Eric Gagne was juicing when he set the record for consecutive saves, and anyone that wants to tell me that those drugs have no effect, look at what Gagne was like this past season. Don't tell me it was the injuries he suffered a couple of years ago. He was healthy this year. Based on what he was like last season, Gagne would never have approached the level he was at when he was the most dominant closer in baseball.

I'm not trying to pick on baseball here.

As I mentioned before, Steinbrenner is (I can feel the bile in the back of my throat) right. Football still has a problem. According to transcripts in the BALCO case, the vast majority of players on the Broncos and the 49ers were implicated in the use of HGH.

That doesn't take into account our hometown Rodney Harrison, the members of the Panthers Super Bowl entrant, Bill Romanowksi, Shawn Merriman, and any number of other players who have been nailed since.

I'm not even touching on bicycling, which saw its thinnest competition in the Tour de France last year due to doping disqualifications. Or running, a sport that has seen some of its biggest stars nailed over the course of the last two decades - Ben Johnson, Marion Jones, Tim Montgomery, marathoner Uta Pippig.

Then, of course, we even saw boxing (big surprise) implicated in the Albany investigation.

It's hard to look at what is happening at the highest levels of athletic competition and not view these people with some level of skepticism.

Bible Stories it ain't

I don't know what Roger Clemens was thinking.

He had a choice about yesterday. He chose to go forward with the hearing when chairman Henry Waxman was ready to call it off.

I'm not what one would call a religious person...in any way, shape, or form...but I'm about to make a correlation here...

It was like he thought the result of yesterday would be that he were Abraham's son, saved from the knife on the sacrificial altar at the last minute. It didn't happen yesterday.

What happened yesterday -

• Clemens appeared to have engaged in perjury, trying desperately to contradict the stories of Brian McNamee, Andy Pettitte, Pettitte's wife, his own nanny, and even his own story at times - while successfully discrediting his alibi - Jose Canseco - by admitting that he did spend some time at the party at Canseco's, in spite of Canseco's sworn affidavit to the contrary.
• Clemens might have engaged in witness tampering, and, when called on it, had the arrogance to tell the committee that he had done them a favor.
  
• McNamee was revealed to be nothing more than what he is - a liar and a drug distributor. No more so than what anyone already knew - but no one was able to determine what McNamee would have to gain out of an action that has effectively ruined his professional career? Everyone knew going in and coming out what Clemens had to gain.
• We learned that Clemens, in his desperation, would throw everybody - including his wife, legal representation, and agents - under the bus in order to avoid culpability for his mistakes.
• We found out that Clemens wouldn't fire his agents in the face of what would have to be gross incompetence and negligence, if what he claims about notification of George Mitchell's investigation is true, and he wasn't notified.
• We now know that, if what the Rocket says is true about not knowing that Debbie Clemens dropped trou in her bedroom for McNamee, a man once accused of rape, that her judgment is as questionable as her husband's. I, for one, know no women who would be caught alone in a room with someone even suspected of that crime, if they could help it.
• We found that the republican contingent of the contingent seemed more interested in pontificating about how untrustworthy McNamee was while engaging in blatant hero worship in the direction of Clemens.

What we found out today, is why Clemens and his lawyers...and the Republicans on the committee...would engage in this farce. For those who have forgotten - the Rocket is a friend of the Bush family.

McNamee's lawyer believes that Clemens' handlers allowed him to participate in this farce because the Rocket could get a pardon from W. Unfortunately, it's not that far fetched an idea.

I, for one, am hoping that if this does end up in front of the judiciary, it extends into next year, and beyond the reach of Bush.

That might seem harsh to some, but this is, as I said before, someone who hasn't been able to explain why his former trainer would do this beyond "a cheap stunt," and "the feds were targeting me." This is in spite of the fact that McNamee's lawyer has noted that the feds never mentioned Clemens and were perfectly professional, and that if McNamee has lied then he goes to jail, and if he hasn't, his professional career is shot to hell. Hardly cheap.

This is also someone who, as I also noted, has demonstrated nothing but arrogance and a sense of entitlement somehow believing, through the whole process that he's above reproach - trying to convince everybody that he is more reliable than George Mitchell, the man who put together the Northern Ireland Peace Accord. The man who repeatedly tried to contact Clemens before the report came out.

It is looking more and more like there is no doubt that Clemens did indeed do something illegal, and that he cheated...and he needs to be held accountable.

No new contracts, pro-rated, or otherwise.

No Hall.

No freedom.

At this point, in my opinion, the man is a cheat and a criminal and should be treated as such.

And on a final note - I think I'm going to miss this when it all goes away...and it will. I mean, really, this has been the best soap opera on television in recent times.

Select fraternities no one wishes to be in...

There are several select and growing fraternities among the professional athlete set.

None of which are ones you want to pledge if you are an athlete.

Okay, the first is one no one wants to be a part of and it has a new pledge.

It's the one with a membership that includes Lance Armstrong, Jon Lester, and Joe Andruzzi now includes Vikings defensive end Kenechi Udeze. According to a report in the Mineapolis-St. Paul Star-Tribune that hit the Internet at about midnight, Udeze has been diagnosed with leukemia, a cancer of the blood that originates in the bone marrow.

According to reports, Udeze spent time at the Mayo Clinic last week.

Currently, Udeze is undergoing tests at Fairview Southdale Hospital to determine the grade/severity of the particular type of leukemia with which he is afflicted. For more information on leukemia, and its four different varieties, visit the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society's Web site.

Kenechi, Joe...get better soon guys.

The other fraternity...

Pi Epsilon Delta...PED, the performance enhancing drug users.

As much as Roger Clemens is desperately trying to make it look like he hasn't already pledged this group with a defense that pretty much amounts to, at this point, "what I say is right, what everybody else says is wrong."

His agents want to compare him to other pitchers, but when Ivy League statistics professors point out the errors in the methodology of the Clemens camp, and present their own report, they're wrong and "The professors make the mistake of thinking that his career arc should look like the arc of every other pitcher in their selected group," Hendricks said in a statement. the professors, of course, didn't use a small cross section, and they likely got the age ranges of their pitchers right. But no, according to the Clemens camp, the statisticians are wrong.

Now it's beginning to come out that Andy Pettitte's version of events appears to back Brian McNamee's story (never mind the fact that the Clemens camp still has failed to explain why McNamee would be telling the truth about both Pettitte and Chuck Knoblauch).

Even more amazing - why wasn't there an immediate denial from Clemens and his people in regards to his wife getting shot up before an SI shoot? Is it because of the physical evidence that has surfaced? Are they now concerned that they've backed themselves into a corner over the Rocket, and are worried about painting the corner smaller?

He may be fighting tooth and nail to not be a member of Pi Epsilon, but, by all appearances, he's already a member - along with the likes of Marion Jones, Barry Bonds, and the whistle-blower - Jose Canseco.

The righteous and the wicked

As fans we are typically raised in our own particular denomination - Sox, Yankees, Colts, Penguins. Sometimes it's because of family, sometimes it's regional.

We've been raised to believe that there is something pure and good about sports.

The character of Terrence Mann in Field of Dreams concludes his keynote speech with, "And they'll watch the game and it'll be as if they dipped themselves in magic waters. The memories will be so thick they'll have to brush them away from their faces. People will come Ray. The one constant through all the years, Ray, has been baseball. America has rolled by like an army of steamrollers. It has been erased like a blackboard, rebuilt and erased again. But baseball has marked the time. This field, this game: it's a part of our past, Ray. It reminds of us of all that once was good and it could be again. Oh... people will come Ray. People will most definitely come."

The fact is, people that play sports - and I'm not talking about those of us that play pick-up games of basketball on Saturdays, or in softball leagues after work - no, those that were competitive enough to be in that handful of players to ever make it to the majors, the coaches, the trainers, these people are some of the most competitive people in the world.

They look for edges, often going out of the bounds allowed by their sport, sometimes venturing into the outright illegal. And this is not limited to American athletes or coaches.

Look at Marion Jones, Tim Montgomery, Barry Bonds, Bjarne Riss, Roger Clemens, and Lyle Alzado to name a few. By all reports, these people are the ones who looked for shortcuts, looked for the edge that going outside the bounds of the rules of their sport, and sometimes the laws of their country.

If you doubt how competitive these people are, consider that Pete Rose ended the career of a catcher in an All-Star game. A game that didn't even count.

The history of professional sports is a history of cheating and controversy, as much as we would like to convince ourselves otherwise, as often as we try to convince ourselves otherwise, the fact remains that there is nothing clean about pro sports.

The Patriots have Spygate, the Chicago White Sox will always have the Black Sox Scandal, the Packers and Lions will always each have a highly regarded player (historically speaking) in the 1960's who were both suspended for a season for gambling on the game. The Reds will always have Pete Rose, and Rose will always carry the stigma of betting on baseball.

Questions will always dog Floyd Landis and Lance Armstrong. There will always be questions regarding the timing of Martina Hingis and the timing of her retirement in regards to an alleged positive test for cocaine, violating the WTA's drug policy.

In spite of mounds of incontrivertible evidence that pro sports is rife with cheating, we, as fans, get indignant over the fact that an opposing team cheated to win. We yell cheater(!) and point fingers, and try to claim the team that is the subject of our affections in a given sport is on some sort of moral high ground.

As a Red Sox fan, I always felt, from a public standpoint, that the Sox and the fan base lost the moral high ground on the steroid issue back in the mid 1990's when they added Jose Canseco to the roster. I felt it then, I feel it now.

Owners hold cities hostage, favorite players bail in favor of better money elsewhere, officials get nailed in gambling scandals. But we keep coming back, and we defend our teams with the rabid, one-mindedness of a pitbull. We are Crusaders for the Patriots, Giants, or Eagles.

Sometimes we are misguided in our attacks, sometimes because of misrepresentation by the press, sometimes because we are going to impress our preconceived notions upon a team we don't like, and have no desire for the making a judgment based on the facts. It is a religion, like all religions, based on faith and emotion.

And like religion, the government has no place in the games, unless the governing bodies of the games turn their heads and look the other way when federal and state laws are violated. For those of you who do, think about it this way - hypothetically, you own a contracting firm and are a member of your local chamber of commerce. You cut corners by setting studs two inches farther apart in your building than you are supposed to. Arlen Specter calls for an investigation into your business practices by Congress and compares your violation of building standards to illegal practices by the CIA. Anyone else sense the incongruity?

As for the Anti-trust Exemption that people claim give him the right. Let them remove it. See how football suffers. If football looses the exemption, then the draft goes away. The exemption is what allows the NFL to tell a player coming out of college that the Bills, or the Raiders, or the Panthers own a player's rights for a year. That goes away and the teams with the best profit margins - the Patriots, the Redskins, the Cowboys, and large market teams like the Giants are the only ones that can get the best talent coming out of college. Football becomes baseball.

Teams like Buffalo, Green Bay, Tampa Bay, Tennessee...they might as well kiss their collective futures goodbye.

As for Specter...this is a joke. His impartiality is questionable, at best, considering he's an Eagles fan and is pretty much tailoring his inquiry to the Eagle's Super Bowl loss to the Patriots, and his second largest contributor during the last election was Comcast, one of the companies locked in the legal dispute with the NFL over the NFL Network. He comes off more as a fan pissed about his team losing a championship than as an official trying to protect the integrity of the game.

And as a fan, he's wielding the cudgel that he he has - the Anti-trust Exemption - in a matter that was already handled in-house, as it should have been.

As for his claim that the NFL might need the evidence it destroyed at a different time, this isn't a court of law, nothing illegal was done. What need is there to hang on to evidence that had already leaked to the press to the embarrassment of the NFL? Specter is mistaking an in-house issue for something of the severity of baseball's steroid scandal, which did indeed violate federal law.

And people wonder why the Republican Party took a beating in the last election.

As fans, sometimes we need to temper our emotions. Sometimes we need to do a little footwork on our own, and not completely trust the media - they are, after all, in the business of selling papers and advertising. It behooves them to present stories in a way that will allow them the largest possible circulation. It's why the headlines were, "Pat's caught stealing signals," rather than, "Pat's caught putting together game film from forbidden location."

Presenting the story as taping from a location not allowed, but that stealing signals is...just not a sexy story.

It's why we'll never know what really happened with Terrell Owens just before the beginning of the season, but "attempted suicide" sells papers.

Sure, in our judicial system everyone is accorded the benefit of the doubt - innocent until proven guilty. But that's not the way the court of public opinion works.

For the detractors of the Patriots, this season will always be tainted - in spite of the fact that they were probably the most scrutinized team in the league this year, that the film was confiscated before the end of the first quarter of the first game and the NFL said that there was no way that the film could have been used, that nothing else untoward happened during the season. Those same people will always doubt the validity the 2001 win over the Rams due to unsubstantiated rumors that the Patriots taped the Rams' walk-through the day before. It's the nature of being a fan who doesn't like a team, or who resents a team.

But it remains the same for other teams that this happened to - the Yankees of the late 1990's will, in many people's heads, always have the taint of a large number of steroid users on that club. For some, it will always be remembered that the 1972 Dolphins were without a first round draft pick due to a penalty levied for tampering with a coach (Shula) who was still under contract with another team.

The instances of cheating and impropriety in sports are legion. And anyone who thinks they root for a team that's innocent, well they're just kidding themselves.

Fuzzy Logic

Fuzzy logic seems to be in abundance these days.

Fuzzy logic comes from fuzzy math...let's start with some fuzzy math - the kind that doesn't add up.

Yesterday Roger Clemens continued his farce with a 17-minute tape of a phone conversation with trainer-turned-informant Brian McNammee. The tape told us absolutely diddly-squat.

Here's the math on this subject -

Clemens' initial denial issued by his lawyer and reported by CNN on December 14...

"Roger Clemens adamantly, vehemently, and whatever other adjectives can be used, denies that he has ever used steroids or ... improper substances," Clemens' attorney, Rusty Hardin, said Thursday.
"He is really, really concerned and upset that he has been named in this report. It's based on the allegations, apparently, of a trainer that he's had in the past. ... That's not a standard someone should be held out in public to have done something as serious as using steroids in baseball."

...

"Roger has been repeatedly tested for these substances and he has never tested positive," Hardin said in a statement. "There has never been one shred of tangible evidence that he ever used these substances and yet he is being slandered today."
Hardin told reporters that Clemens had not been given the opportunity to defend himself.

Let's start with the last point Hardin makes. Clemens had plenty of opportunity to defend himself when invited to talk to George Mitchell. He chose not to do so. Let's be realistic about this as well - it's not as though Clemens was going to assume Mitchell just wanted to hang out and talk about baseball. He knew what Mitchell was doing, he had to know that Mitchell called him because he had been named. Issue one that doesn't pass the smell test.

Lidocaine is a class VI drug. Class VI drugs require a prescription for use and is administered by a physician - not a physical trainer. Issue two.

Vitam B12 is a professional sports euphemism for the steroid Winstrol, which is what McNamee claims to have injected Clemens with. Don't believe it, just ask Rafael Palmeiro. Issue three.

Here's my favorite, and it comes from an interview with Steve Phillips on ESPN's Mike and Mike in the Morning - Phillips, for those of you who don't know, played baseball and was at one time the general manager of the New York Mets - "We're talking a strength and conditioning coach. In my twenty years within a major league organization, seven as a player, thirteen in a front office, I have never heard of a strength and conditioning coach giving any legitimate injection to a player. In fact, trainers do not give injections, only physicians give injections."

This was followed up by the former NFL defensive tackle Mike Golic's agreement, "I will say, I was never injected by a trainer...I have never heard of that before." And Buster Olney's statement, "I completely concur with what Steve said. In talking with people around baseball last night, they said they cannot see a situation in which a trainer would be giving injections to players as a matter of routine." Issue four.

From an ESPN.com report -

Asked why McNamee would tell the truth about Pettitte and lie about Clemens,
Clemens said Pettitte's case was "totally separate."

How is it that Mike Wallace didn't follow up on this? How are the cases totally separate? From all accounts, Clemens introduced Pettitte to McNamee. Pettitte confirmed that McNamee was telling the truth in regards to him - why would he then be lying about Clemens? Both sloppy reporting and issue five. He offered no explanation in regards to how Pettitte's case is "totally separate."

I don't buy that the timing of when his lawyers (finally) filed the suit against McNamee as a coincidence either. It came two days after Clemens was asked to appear before Congress along with Pettitte and McNamee. The allows Clemens to, in effect, go in front of the Congressional committee and claim that he can't answer certain questions due to the pending litigation without ever having to take the Fifth. Issue six.

Right now it looks like Clemens is trying to convince the court of public opinion that by adding five and five, you get six.

Fuzzy math part two -

The closer it gets, the funnier the math gets. Somehow, Mercury Morris and his 1972 Dolphin compatriots would have us believe that 17=19. Neat trick, but wrong.

Yes, it would be only the second team in the NFL to go undefeated during a season, but what does that really mean? It means that they had a streak that ran during one season, rather than over the course of two.

The whole discussion always comes back to how hard it is to win 16 in a row. The Tom Brady/Bill Belichick Patriots have done it twice.

Those 17 Dolphin wins included the postseason. The Patriots already have one streak that exceeds that at 21.

The longest regular season winning streak the 'Phins even had was 15 games. The Patriots are owners of both an 18-game and now 19-game regular season winning streaks.

None of this takes into account the fact that the Patriots deal with free-agency, the salary cap, and weighted schedules - all elements of today's game designed to keep the sort of dominance the Patriots have shown from happening.

Sure, the Patriots haven't gone 19-0, and might not, but the self-appointed greatest team to ever play the game would have you believe that 17=19, and that the best the Pats could do is "join us on the mountain top."

Sorry guys. They do it, then they're the king of the mountain.

Mythology

It's amazing, the difference between fact and fiction in professional sports. That which is accepted as fact, often by the apologists or those looking to bolster their own arguments in an effort to make a player, coach, or organization look either better or worse. Sometimes the myth is true...or more accurately, the truth is so wild or great that it becomes mythic - the Immaculate Reception, Carlton Fisk's home run in game six of the 1975 World Series, Kirk Gibson, the 1980 Olympic American ice hockey team, and so on. Sometimes it becomes difficult to separate myth from fact.

Let's take a shot at a couple of the big myths floating around professional sports today...

Myth - Bill Belichick was fined $500,0000.00 for filming the Jets' signals. The knock, among fans of other teams, is that Belichick cheated by stealing signals.

Fact - Belichick was fined for filming from the sideline, the fact that he was shooting the defensive signals was incidental. According to the following report from when the story broke -

From reports when the story broke -

As part of the league's investigation, Goodell determined the filming of Jets coaches had no impact on the outcome of the game. Goodell also ruled that Robert Kraft and Patriots ownership were unaware of the filming...The NFL's rules state that "no video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches' booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game" and that all video shooting locations for coaching purposes "must be enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead."

In a memo to NFL head coaches and general managers on Sept. 6, 2006, NFL executive vice president of football operations Ray Anderson wrote: "Videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches' booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game."

So...according to the NFL, the issue had nothing to do with them taping signals, and everything to do with where they taped from. According to this, any team can film its opponent's signals as long as the filming location is not accessible during the game - like, say, one of the skyboxes, which is enclosed on all sides with a picture window facing the field.

Myth - "Steroids don't help you hit the ball." This is the favorite defense of Bonds apologists who first will argue that he never used (he did, he admitted it, get it through your thick skulls) and even if he did...(see statement above)...

Fact - No, the performance enhancers largely don't help a person with their natural ability to hit the ball, but they do, in the end, help a batter hit...

To wit, steroids and other performance enhancers in baseball are used in order to recover faster from games, double headers, and other workouts. They also make the player stronger.

Increased strength and faster recovery time results in the following -

• Balls hit harder, thus, the ball travels both farther and faster. Balls dying on the warning track get deposited three rows behind the outfield wall. Balls barely reached by the middle infielder in the hole get by for hits.
• The player using these drugs is fresher at the end of a ten game stretch than the one not using, thus allowing the user to turn on a ball, with the greater likelihood of putting it into play than the tired opponent whose timing might be off enough to make his swing result in a foul ball or strike, instead of a hit. Hmmm...help hitting the ball. Who would've thought. Oh, right, the ball players injecting themselves with steroids.
• Balls get thrown harder by power pitchers losing their power

Myth - Baseball didn't even have a rule banning steroids in 1998.

Fact - MLB had a rule passed in 1971. According to the Mitchell Report a drug policy was written in MLB that prohibits using any prescription medicine without a prescription. From all reports, virtually none of the players named for use of either steroids or HGH had a prescription from a doctor. And those that did had their prescription from less than reputable doctors (see Paul Bird).

So, based on this 1971 rule, steroid and HGH users were in violation of MLB's rules and regulations, and use of those substances, in essence, has been against baseball's rules for the last 26 years.

Then in 1991, just to be safe, then commissioner Fay Vincent added steroids to the prohibited substance list.

Myth - The offensive coordinator of a record setting offense will make for a great head coach.

Fact - Right now 31-year old Patriots offensive coordinator Josh McDaniel is generating interest from both the Falcons and the Ravens for their head coaching vacancies. Recent jumps from record setting coordinator to head coach have included Mike Martz and Brian Billick.

While it can be debated as to how successful Billick was, winning a Super Bowl and making multiple playoffs, one thing is certain - Billick was brought to a Ravens team that already had a solid defense, with the purpose of putting together a championship caliber offense. His offenses, over his nine years with the Ravens, have averaged 23rd. Only twice in the Ravens last six seasons have the Ravens achieved at least ten wins and the playoffs.

He inherited a team that had an improving defense, a slowly improving record, and an opportunity to build the offense he wanted. The offensive guru has been so good at identifying the talent he needed at key positions that he had 12 different quarterbacks start for him during his nine seasons at the helm.

Mike Martz won a Super Bowl ring running the Greatest Show on Turf for Dick Vermeil. Without Vermeil's tempering hand, Martz eventually went pass-happy, let the defense deteriorate, and the team's record eventually suffered in subsequent years.

Under Vermeil, during his last season at the helm, the Rams ranked 4th in points allowed on defense. Under Martz in the first year, 31st. Over the five full seasons at the helm, his defenses finished an average of 17th in points allowed and was fired in a year that the team was again 31st.

Gaudy numbers get you noticed, and there is success to be had with these coaches, but the numbers in a record setting season sets the bar impossibly high. Billick's offense in Minnesota was fueled by a young Randy Moss, just as McDaniels' offense in New England is fueled by Moss.

What is the likelihood that McDaniels will be the solution in Baltimore when they have a scouting office that can't identify a pro-ready quarterback on the collegiate level, or a veteran that still has some gas left in the tank?

New Year, new season

Happy New Year to all my readers.

The change of a year is always time for reflection. As I've never been one for resolutions, I'll settle for reflection.

With the advent of 2008, so begins the NFL post season. The Patriots are the odds on favorites, the Colts are being looked at as having the best chance of knocking off the first team that went 16-0. Let's look back at some of what the pundits have said about the Patriots, and some of the other stories that started in 2007, and will follow us through 2008...

"The Eagles have given us the blueprint on how to beat the Patriots..."

This is what the pundits said after the Eagles played the Patriots fairly evenly from wire to wire. The Eagles still lost by a field-goal. Interesting statement, but wrong.

The blueprint provided by the Eagles is the one most likely to beat the Patriots given that they have only beaten teams that have played like that by an average of three points per game. However, until there's a number in that loss column that doesn't look like a big egg, to make that as a definitive statement is just wrong.

The Giants came out and played that same physical game, and gave up 38 points.

The Mitchell Report...

The 2008 baseball season is going to be played under the shadow of the Mitchell Report, and Roger Clemens less than believable denials of his steroid use. Clemens and Barry Bonds are going to continue to dominate the headlines like they have in recent weeks.

Both of these situations will resolve themselves this year, but neither are going to go away any time soon.

Tuna Helper

The announcement of Bill Parcells return to the NFL coincided with the week the Patriots played the now 1-15 Dolphins. The Tuna has already begun to clean house, and rumors have it that he is likely to plunder personnel people from his last NFL stop, the Cowboys.

While the news of him joining his third AFC East franchise will fade quickly, every time this team plays one of his former teams, be it the Jets, Pats, or Cowboys, this will be brought up, as will some variation on the term "Bill-Bowl"

New Englanders need to be ready for that last item at least twice a year for as long as Parcells and Belichick play for their respective teams.

Pacman Jones

With the season over, Jones is likely to receive his reinstatement for next season, assuming he can continue to keep his nose clean, and he can keep out of jail. If one of his many transgressions result in jail time, I wouldn't be surprised to see Roger Goodell extend his suspension.

The Boston Three Party...

The new Big Three of Ray Allen, Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett have not only made the Celtics relevant in Boston again, but have the team as the odds on favorite to represent the East in the NBA finals, while on pace for a record 74 win season. Amazing for a team that finished its last season with a second worst league total of 24 wins.

Happy New Year Paul Pierce...it's a brand new day for you.

Overrated Savior...

The rumors regarding the Boston-Minnesota trade of Johan Santana will continue until the season starts, if nothing is consummated before the season begins.

I'm on record as saying that the Sox are already offering too much for a player that the Twins either have to move, or receive nothing for. Minnesota is demanding top prospects as well as Jacoby Ellsbury, along with one of the following pitchers - Clay Buchholz, or Jon Lester.

The Sox package includes Lester, Coco Crisp, and shortstop Jed Lowrie, along with pitcher Justin Masterson. Both Lowrie and Masterson project as big leaguers. Lester already has a better post-season history than Santana who has a horrible ERA in Fenway park, and a history of wilting down the stretch.

Right now the Sox hold the cards in this, and as long as they can keep Santana away from the Yankees without selling the farm - especially considering that the Sox will need a shortstop sometime soon - then I say let Santana languish in Minnesota.

This story might go away come April, but it will return at the trade deadline.

Philosophical question(s) for the week...

In light of the Mitchell Report and the pending holiday which always invokes, for me, the films of Frank Capra (It's a Wonderful Life), I am forced to correlate MLB to Mr. Smith Goes to Washington...

Is it just me, or does Roger Clemens somehow come off like Senator Joe Payne (the corrupt politician played so well by Claude Rains) right now and after an early round of skepticism from the masses, George Mitchell as the naive but well meaning Jefferson Smith?

Does that make we, the baseball fans, the boys for which Mitchell is trying to build a camp?

The Baseball Writers Association of America, which is looking at this as "The Steroid Era" as justification for enshrining a generation of cheaters, part of the Taylor Machine?

The bloggers who are expressing outrage reporter Diz Moore? (Diz Moore: [into phone] Throw out that last, take this. This is the most titanic battle of modern times. A David without even a slingshot rises to do battle against the mighty Goliath, the Taylor machine, allegedly crooked inside and out. Yeah, and for my money, you can cut out the "allegedly.")

Just some thoughts...

Rules violations

Eat it steroid apologists who defend steroid usage by these players with the following argument - well it wasn't banned by baseball at the time. There are a number of reasons that it doesn't matter. Many which I have already addressed. One is that Baseball shouldn't have to make rules regarding substances that are banned by federal law. It should be understood that you can't administer anything to yourself that is banned by federal law without a prescription.

And there's one of the key words. Prescription.

Which brings me to 1971.

It's an important year for baseball.

MLB is within its rights to discipline players for steroids and HGH for the pre-ban time period because of 1971. According to the Mitchell Report a drug policy was written in MLB that prohibits using any prescription medicine without a prescription. From all reports, virtually none of the players named had a prescription from a doctor.

So, based on this 1971 rule, steroid and HGH users were in violation of MLB's rules and regulations.

In 1991, just to be safe, then commissioner Fay Vincent added steroids to the prohibited substance list.

All of the above notwithstanding, I put the following question to the steroid apologists out there - If administering these drugs wasn't really cheating because, as you like to say, it wasn't against baseball's rules (which, apparently it was), then why did the players do all of this in a clandestine manner? Why sneak around? Why deny it when caught if there's nothing wrong with what you're doing?

No Excuses

"I did it to recover faster from an injury, not to gain a competitive advantage on the field."

That is the popular excuse being presented by athletes caught using HGH and other performance enhancing substances. "I only used it to recover from (insert injury du jour here)."

This is the excuse that San Diego defensive end Louis Castillo first made popular before the 2005 NFL draft. It is the excuse that Patriots safety Rodney Harrison used (in spite of the fact that records show he initially purchased it during a time that he had no reported injury - no one followed up on that and he offered no additional excuse) when caught, it is the excuse that Andy Pettitte is hiding behind and it is the excuse that former second baseman Fernando Vina.

It is the excuse that any number of athletes I expect will use in the future.

It is a complete crock.

For anyone who thinks it isn't, I put to you the following question - if star player from Team A and star player from Team B suffer identical injuries, and Player A goes through proper (ie: legal and legitimate) physical therapy and rehab to get back on the field and it takes that player five weeks to get back, but Player B uses HGH and is back in three and half weeks, then how is that NOT a competitive advantage?

This smacks of the same argument put forth by Bonds supporters of, "it doesn't help him hit the ball," but, in light of recent studies - they're wrong. There was a recent report stating that HGH appears to improve eyesight. Improved eyesight will help a batter see the ball. The hormone helps muscles rebound faster from workouts - which means that in that tenth straight game, when non-users are fatigued, the user is fresher and more apt to be able to turn on a ball. It helps them get stronger, resulting in balls hit farther, faster.

Make no mistake. None of this is just about "recovering faster." It's all about getting on the field and an unfair competitive advantage.

Just once, I would like to hear one of these athletes say, "I cheated, I was caught and I'm sorry. I have disgraced myself, my team, and my sport. I knew at the time I was doing something wrong, but I want so bad to be the best on the field that it drove me to do something stupid and unforgivable in the context of the sport in which I compete. I wish I could promise that I would not make the same choice had I a chance to do it all over again, but, given my competitive nature, I don't think I can make that promise. I'm sorry."

We'll never hear it. But it really would be nice to hear one of these athletes completely own up to their mistake rather than try to find a way to excuse it that they believe will be palatable to the general public.

Unfortunately, there are many in the general public that are part of the problem - also making excuses for why, when their sports heroes are caught red-handed, we should take their less-than-heartfelt apology at face value. I'd like to thank Lisa at A Red Sox State of Maine for providing a link to the following from the New York Sun -

Corrupt in conception, inept in execution, this is in general a vile report. What decency there is in it comes from, of all people, Andy Pettitte. The ostentatiously religious Pettitte, who deserves and will receive a rousing ovation the next time he takes the mound at Yankee Stadium, will be scorned by many as a hypocrite, but according to the second-hand accounting of this report, he decided to use HGH because he thought it would "speed his recovery and help his team." And what could be nobler than that?

This reporter's defense of Pettitte is that he's "ostentatiously religious." First, I have to question whether or not this reporter knows what the word ostentatious means, or if he's just using big words to try to make people think he's intelligent. Because he comes off as an idiot. Were I Pettitte and truly religious, I would be offended by someone who described me as ostentatiously so.

For people wondering - it means rich and showy: marked by a vulgar display of wealth and success designed to impress people. So this dude is saying that Pettitte is showing religion only to impress people.

But I digress.

His argument (I will leave the whole "noble" thing to Lisa who handled that quite well) is that we should give Pettitte the benefit of the doubt because he's religious and, in essence, religious people would never do bad things. To that I give two names that are just the tip of the iceberg: John J. Geoghan and Ronald H. Paquin.

For those of you unfamiliar with those names, they are both priests - a profession that most would agree has some fairly religious people. These two were part of the Catholic Church's long running conspiracy to conceal child molesters within its clergy. Geoghan died in jail after convicted, Paquin plead guilty to the crime, claiming that he himself was a victim at the hands of a member of the clergy while a boy in Salem.

By reporter Tim Marchman's reasoning, this couldn't be true because these men are religious.

What an idiot.

On a lighter note (pardon the pun) - down to 184 this morning, a total loss of 4.5 pounds.

Texas Toast

No player was hit harder by the release of the Mitchell Report than Roger Clemens. Sure, Barry Bonds is (the only player) mentioned more often in the former senator's report, but let's face it, the damage was done there long ago.

Following the release of the report, the Rocket's lawyer Rusty Hardin issued the following non-denial, “It is very unfair to include Roger’s name in this report. He is left with no meaningful way to combat what he strongly contends are totally false allegations. He has not been charged with anything, he will not be charged with anything and yet he is being tried in the court of public opinion with no recourse. That is totally wrong. There has never been one shred of tangible evidence that he ever used these substances and yet he is being slandered today."

Essentially, Hardin called Mitchell's witness against Clemens a liar without ever directly denying any of former trainer Brian McNamee's allegations of steroid use (he never said I didn't do it, he just said McNamee's allegations are false - what? That McNamee administered the steroid injections? That it was those specific steroids? What exactly is false?). Hardin made no indication that he would be filing any sort of legal action against the report (and the last time I checked, Major League Baseball, which has assumed indemnity for any legal action, has very deep pockets).

The biggest problem for Clemens and his legacy arose this weekend when former teammate and long-time friend Andy Pettitte, who was named in McNamee's testimony, lent the report a whopping dose of credibility by copping to the use of HGH - a year after he denied ever using the hormone (his name came up with the Jason Grimsley incident).

While Pettitte's apology was offensive to anyone with half a brain - "If what I did was an error in judgment on my part, I apologize...If I have let down people that care about me, I am sorry, but I hope that you will listen to me carefully and understand that two days of perhaps bad judgment should not ruin a lifetime of hard work and dedication." Where's the actual apology there? IF? There are more qualifiers in that statement than they have at the Olympic Trials for Track and Field.

This is tantamount to saying, "I'm not sorry for what I did. I'm sorry I got caught, and I'm sorry YOU'RE offended. But, no, I'm not sorry for what I did."

I think that Dan Graziano from the Newark Star-Ledger (Yankees country by the way) said it best when he put the following to paper -

If he truly felt bad about what he did, why didn't he answer Mitchell's questions as earnestly as he's always answered ours? Every player Mitchell named in the report was presented with an opportunity to see the evidence against him and respond. But the final lines of page 176 say about Pettitte what Mitchell says about almost every other player in the document.

"In order to provide Pettitte with information about these allegations and to give him an opportunity to respond, I asked him to meet with me," Mitchell writes. "He declined."

Brian McNamee, the personal trainer for Clemens and Pettitte, told Mitchell that Pettitte asked him about HGH during the 2001-02 off-season. McNamee told Mitchell that he discouraged Pettitte from using it, but that Pettitte brought it up again while on the disabled list in 2002 and McNamee flew to Tampa, Fla., where he injected Pettitte with HGH "on two to four occasions."

McNamee also told Mitchell that Pettitte asked him, in 2003, "what he should say if a reporter asked Pettitte whether he ever used performance-enhancing substances. McNamee told him he was free to say what he wanted, but that he should not go out of his way to bring it up. McNamee also asked Pettitte not to mention his name."

Pettitte knew what he was doing was wrong and he sought advice on how to get away with it. And when Mitchell found out, and tried to present him with the evidence, Pettitte ignored him. Only now that he's been caught does he come remotely clean, and he does so in the way of a cornered criminal, angry at his pursuer for catching him. Why should we believe there's not more to the story? What reason do we have to take his word that he's been clean for all but two days of his life?

Double Standards

The Jets were absolved by any wrong doing by the commissioner's office this past week in regards to their taping at Gillette Stadium last year during the playoffs based on the claim by the Jets that they had permission to film from the mezzanine in the Patriots' home field. I'm puzzled by a number of questions this brings up.

If the Jets employee had permission, what is the proof that was provided to NFL offices? I think, based on the penalties meted out to the Patriots for Belichick's transgressions, the NFL owes that to the Patriot fan base.

If said employee had permission, was he wearing the proper vest and credentials that are issued to...well..credentialled personnel?

Even if the Jets were given permission, is the NFL then saying that team permission supersedes league rules? Consider the following reported by New York Newsday -

NFL rules state "no video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches' booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game." They also say all video for coaching .purposes must be shot from locations "enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead."

Last time I checked, the location the Jets noted that they were filming from was not "enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead." At least it wasn't unless the Jets set up in one of the stadium's snack stands on the mezzanine (assuming there's one with a view of the field).

Herein lies my problem with this - the Jets admitted filming. They publicly admitted filming from a location from which they are not allowed to film. The NFL essentially said, "that's okay because (you said) you got permission." To me, this is like a team going into a game, and then repeatedly committing personal fouls with the referees letting the team get away with it, because the team committing the fouls told the refs they had been given permission by the other team to commit said fouls.

The NFL either has to mete out discipline evenly for this, or the league needs to revisit the rule.

But this uneven application brings me to a baseball point.

As I have noted before, there are a number of baseball writers, including ESPN's Buster Olney, who say that they will continue to vote for the likes of Mark MacGwire, Barry Bonds, and Roger Clemens for entry into the Hall of Fame in Cooperstown. The excuse put forth by these writers is, "well, it's just the era they played in, and these were the best in that era."

These are the same people that want to keep Pete Rose as a pariah "in the best interests in baseball." The same people that keep Jim Rice out of the Hall because, in some eyes, his numbers aren't good enough - in spite of the fact that, without steroids, he has considerably better numbers than MacGwire in every offensive category except for homeruns. And, possibly most importantly, these are the same people who won't vote Jose Canseco in due to his steroid use.

The hypocrisy of the BBWA is palpable in the Hall of Fame voting.

There are even those writers, and many fans that like to point out that baseball in many of those years had no rule against steroid use. This is, I think, the most laughable justification. Possession and use of steroids without a prescription is a federal crime. The argument that baseball had no rule governing it is akin to employees of an Edward Jones Financial franchise flouting the federal laws enforced by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), because Edward Jones corporate had no written policies dictating the same as the SEC.

In the case of the Edward Jones employee, that person would first lose his or her job, and then that person would go to jail for violation of federal law. Baseball players appeal to an arbitrator and keep their jobs in spite of violating federal statute. Nice double standard.

Paradise Lost

Nobody got off lightly yesterday.

There were questions as to whether or not Mitchell would avoid implicating the Red Sox due to the fact he is part of the Sox ownership group.

The Red Sox team name came up 37 times in the Mitchell Report. That's once every 11 pages.

Current or ex-Red Sox on the list?

Manny Alexander
Jose Canseco
Roger Clemens
Paxton Crawford
Brendan Donnelly
Chris Donnels
Eric Gagne
Jeremy Giambi
Mike Lansing
Josias Manzanillo
Kent Mercker
Mike Stanton
Mo Vaughn
Steve Woodard

Mitchell, by his own admission, has put together an incomplete list. There are 14 players on this list that wore a Sox uniform (Yankees fans, stuff the "where are all the Red Sox names" accusation - they're right here).

Let's address Clemens one last time, because he is the only sure candidate for the Hall. There are many writers saying that they now won't vote for him, others saying that they will because he was a hall of famer before the 'roids started in 1998. Assuming that it was 1998, and not 1996, as I suspect, when he shared a field with Jose Canseco, then this is what his numbers look like pre-1998 -

203-118, 2882 strikeouts, 3.09 ERA, and a 2-3 postseason record.

There are those that argue that Curt Schilling will only get in based on his post-season performance because he doesn't have enough regular season wins. So, if Schilling's 216 wins isn't enough, how could Clemens be a Hall-of-Famer before the rumors of steroid use?

If you adjust for when I think he started, which was the 1996 season, then he only has 172 wins.

No. Clemens was not a Hall of Fame pitcher before the rumors of juicing. He was very good. But he was and is not "the best right-handed pitcher ever," which some baseball pundits have called him over the last couple of years. That distinction still belongs to Nolan Ryan.