Thread: Sources tell SI Alex Rodriguez tested positive for steroids in 2003

PS - And Phelps is such a loser/bad guy/criminal for using MJ

DJ is all like - What a dic

By RONALD BLUM, AP Baseball Writer 28 minutes ago

NEW YORK (AP)—Alex Rodriguez admitted Monday that he used performance-enhancing drugs from 2001-03, saying he did so because of the pressures of being baseball’s highest-paid player.

“When I arrived in Texas in 2001, I felt an enormous amount of pressure. I felt like I had all the weight of the world on top of me and I needed to perform, and perform at a high level every day,” the New York Yankees star said in an interview with ESPN that was broadcast Monday shortly after it was recorded.

Rodriguez, who for years has denied using steroids, was given a $252 million, 10-year contract by the Texas Rangers in December 2000.

His admission came two days after Sports Illustrated reported he tested positive for steroids in 2003, one of 104 players who tested positive during baseball’s survey testing, which wasn’t subject to discipline and was supposed to remain anonymous.

“Back then it was a different culture. It was very loose. I was young. I was stupid,” he said. “I was naive, and I wanted to prove to everyone that, you know, I was worth, you know—and being one of the greatest players of all time.”

Rodriguez hit 52, 57 and 47 homers in his three seasons with the Rangers, winning the first of three AL MVP awards during his final season with Texas. Because the Rangers were uncompetitive, he pushed for a trade to the Yankees in February 2004. Although he’s won two more MVP awards in pinstripes, he’s been a postseason failure and has never been to the World Series.
In this Feb. 20, 2008 file photo, New York Yankees' Alex Rodriguez, left, talks with Andy Pettitte as they stretch during spring training baseball workouts in Tampa, Fla. How A-Rod responds to a report that he tested positive for steroids in 2003 will likely frame his pursuit of the career home run record and could define his playing days in the view of fans and Hall of Fame voters.
In this Feb. 20, 2008 file pho…
AP - Feb 9, 9:53 am EST

“It was such a loosey-goosey era. I’m guilty for a lot of things. I’m guilty for being negligent, naive, not asking all the right questions,” Rodriguez said. “And to be quite honest, I don’t know exactly what substance I was guilty of using.”

SI.com reported he tested positive for Primobolan and testosterone.

“And I did take a banned substance and, you know, for that I’m very sorry and deeply regretful. And although it was the culture back then and Major League Baseball overall was very—I just feel that—You know, I’m just sorry. I’m sorry for that time. I’m sorry to fans. I’m sorry for my fans in Texas. It wasn’t until then that I ever thought about substance of any kind, and since then I’ve proved to myself and to everyone that I don’t need any of that.”

Rodriguez directly contradicted a December 2007 interview with CBS’s “60 Minutes,” when he said, “No” when asked whether he’s ever used steroids, human growth hormone or any other performance-enhancing substance.

“I’ve never felt overmatched on the baseball field,” he said then. “I felt that if I did my, my work as I’ve done since I was, you know, a rookie back in Seattle, I didn’t have a problem competing at any level.”

That interview came after he opted out of his $252 million contract and agreed to a $275 million, 10-year contract with the Yankees.

All I read in that article were excuses and self doubt. Loosey goosey culture my ass. Under pressure my left foot. Needed to prove I was worth the contract my left nut.

We should get rid of him. He's going to receive the Charles Smith treatment, but worse.

Originally Posted by Devilspawn

By RONALD BLUM, AP Baseball Writer 28 minutes ago


All I read in that article were excuses and self doubt. Loosey goosey culture my ass. Under pressure my left foot. Needed to prove I was worth the contract my left nut.

We should get rid of him. He's going to receive the Charles Smith treatment, but worse.

Should have gotten rid of him when I said - before he cost us more money - the guy is a chode

Originally Posted by orangenblue420

Should have gotten rid of him when I said - before he cost us more money - the guy is a chode

Yeah but we're filthy rich!



Let's watch the backlash with him vs. Pettitte's backlash. Pettitte, being a man of God and character or whatever, received harsh criticism, but not hatred. We forgave him and while it may have tarnished him a bit, we still rooted for him. Not this time. A-Rod lied to us. And I believed him too. I don't hate him nor do I like him. I was on his side when he was heavily criticized by the fans every out he made. But whatever.

Now my list of "I hope this mofo didn't do the stuff or I'll be crushed" includes:

Junior Griffey
Mariano
Jeter
Bernie
Jorge
Manny
Ortiz (although I won't shed a tear)
Pujols
Mr. Met
Stellar pitchers over 40
Frank Thomas

I can't think of others, but if any of these names are on the list, it would hit home for the sake of the game.

Originally Posted by G_Money

Work is keeping me extra busy, but on this, just off the top of my head or things that aren't exactly commonplace:

Kevin Mitchell in a drunken rage cut the head off his girlfriend's cat.

Didn't Albert Belle try to run down kids on Halloween with his car?

Ugueth Urbina chopped up some workers on his farm with a machete, covered them with paint thinner and set them ON FIRE. They were still alive at the time.

I don't remember Plaxico or Pacman doing that.

I don't know if Belle did that or didn't do that. But, Leonard Little literally killed someone with his DUI. Then there is good ole Rae Carruth (spelling?). Ahman Green beat his wife. Then I can literally just pull up all the Cincy, Jville, SD, etc etc etc charges. The NFL gets more press about their thugs and such because there are more.

Urbina....takes the cake.

Just because almost all football players are American and more than half of baseball players are foreign, don't confuse the issue. American crimes all happen here, are reported here, and get splashy news coverage here. Except for domestic abuse and DUI stuff from baseballers, which MLB sweeps under the rug because it's apparently not worth suspending players for. I guess I'm not sure why doing cocaine is bad, but punching your wife is okay.

Baseball players are not choirboys. No, most of the Dominicans and Venezuelans and Puerto Ricans aren't going down to the hip-hop club and waving guns around, but that doesn't make them sparkling citizens and better human beings by default.

You got me on the cocaine and wife thing. I don't get how either of them are good, but I think there is a special place in hell for men who beat women. But, I disagree about the foriegn stuff. They partake in our sport, but we look at baseball as an American thing. They aren't Americans. They don't reflect our culture, or what we do. Dog and chicken fighting over here is looked at as taboo. As it should. But, wasn't it Pedro and Omar Mania (spelling, and he is the GM of the Mets) that got blasted for watching that crap overseas?

At the risk of sounding mean, I just don't count it.

It just means their crimes happen elsewhere. They all go home for the offseason, where they can get anything they want and do almost anything they want, because they're national treasures with money to burn.

Once again, if someone leaves the country, and goes to their home country to committ crimes, on any level, how does the reflect on us? They aren't us. Literally, they stay here for their job. But their friends, family, and past life is over here. If Vladimir Guerra goes out and gets a DUI it would be big news, simply because he is a big name. If Derek Jeter goes out and gets a DUI, it would be huge news because of his name. One of their actions reflects upon us. The other does not.

You keep talking about how it's not okay to be a cheater regardless of whether you get caught or not, or whether you're in the HOF or not.

Well, it's also not okay to commit crimes, regardless of whether those crimes are reported or prosecuted.

You're damn right.

You don't know the private lives of the people you admire on the field, regardless of what type of field that is. "Baseball players are better people than football players or basketball players because their crimes aren't reported, and don't happen on these shores" is a bad argument. A crime not being reported is not the same as one not being committed, and there are plenty of crimes committed by baseball players that never make the news.

It's the truth. I would bet you however much you want that the amount of violent crimes, or crimes in general in the MLB is less than the NFL. The NFL has players who run around and pull guns out on people. They get more domestic charges, more DUI s, they commit more crimes. They also have a tendency to get shot more often. This isn't a coincidence. Now you aren't "better" as a human being for being in the MLB compared to someone being in the NFL. But, the NFL players sure seem to have more of a "thug" mentality than the MLB does.

MLB used to say the same things about its players' steroid usage. "Not a problem. Very minimal. We don't test for it, but I'm sure that's true." Once they test for it, apparently there are a bunch of users.

Which makes sense.

Yeah, it does make sense. Bug Selig is the worst commissioner I have ever seen. The steroids era happened on his watch, and he gets to have that as his legacy forever. He's earned it.

"MLB players don't commit crimes like other athletes" seems strange. Why wouldn't they? Are they from better backgrounds? Well, for the most part no. Poverty is poverty, violence is violence, and if you've ever been to the Carribbean or Central America there's a lot of both. Does MLB screen its players better to weed out the thugs? No. This isn't like golf, where the price to play the game is so high it weeds out thug mentality by the very nature of the sport. Anybody can get a stick and a ball and play baseball.

I don't believe I said they don't commit crimes like other athletes, and if I did I misspoke and I am a moron. What I have been trying to say, and what I think I said, is that they don't commit as manycrimes.

The MLB has been trying for quite some time to spark the interest of the inner city community in the MLB. I remember on Jackie Robinson day last season, or maybe the year before, that they had several old school players talk about that. Is that the answer? Maybe, maybe not.

So why is there less crime among baseball players? Either it's because the percentage of black people in the sport is smaller in baseball and much higher in football, and black people commit disproportionate amount of crimes simply because of the color of their skin and not their monetary or living circumstances (something that people have had trouble supporting for a while now), or it's because the athletes attracted to baseball are of a more genteel and less-violent ilk, and so the violence prone are weeded out and play other sports...

See my response above. I would assume that it isn't so much that people are black than it is that poverty stricken people are at a higher rate to commit crimes. Since there are more people from a poverty stricken area in the NFL, that is my guess.

Or there isn't less crime.

If there isn't less crime in the MLB I would be shocked. If there is an equal amount, or close to it, I would be floored if the NFL didn't have a higher rate of violent crime

Maybe less gun crime, but just because one culture finds it okay to walk around strapped and the other just gets drunk and beats their wives or cuts people up with machetes doesn't make one violent crime better than the other.

In sports DUI's, domestic abuse, and gun charges are common place. Machete choppage is so rare (I feel comfortable saying this) in modern day sports that I don't think you can really try to imply that baseball players do it as much as the other crimes.

Just something to chew on.

~G

My hands hurt.

I pretty much expect to find that almost every athlete cheats in one way or another. It's part of the game and with so many of them out there, who can blame the rest for trying, just so they can level the playing field. Screw it...just legalize it all and see what happens.

Originally Posted by CoachChaz

I pretty much expect to find that almost every athlete cheats in one way or another. It's part of the game and with so many of them out there, who can blame the rest for trying, just so they can level the playing field. Screw it...just legalize it all and see what happens.

I wouldn't be surprised if that estimate of 90% of players shoot up was completely accurate.

Edit: As i read this over, it looks a little harsh, but I'm really not intending it to be. I'm finding this to be far more interesting at the moment than any other discussion we could be having, so try to give me some leeway in tone if it comes across too harshly. I'm enjoying the argument, not trying to pick a fight.

Though my ultimate goal is to cripple King's hands so that I win by default. Mwahahaha...

On with the argument.

~G

You got me on the cocaine and wife thing. I don't get how either of them are good, but I think there is a special place in hell for men who beat women. But, I disagree about the foriegn stuff. They partake in our sport, but we look at baseball as an American thing. They aren't Americans. They don't reflect our culture, or what we do. Dog and chicken fighting over here is looked at as taboo. As it should. But, wasn't it Pedro and Omar Mania (spelling, and he is the GM of the Mets) that got blasted for watching that crap overseas?

At the risk of sounding mean, I just don't count it.

...

Once again, if someone leaves the country, and goes to their home country to committ crimes, on any level, how does the reflect on us? They aren't us. Literally, they stay here for their job. But their friends, family, and past life is over here. If Vladimir Guerra goes out and gets a DUI it would be big news, simply because he is a big name. If Derek Jeter goes out and gets a DUI, it would be huge news because of his name. One of their actions reflects upon us. The other does not.

*blinks*

So you're really saying that foreign players committing crimes doesn't reflect on us, because they're foreign. So their crimes in their countries are not really of consequence to the argument that there are substantially more violent crimes and DUIs in the NFL than there are in MLB.

Carlos Guillen can get a DUI or two (and he has) but he isn't considered a criminal because he's foreign, which is why it doesn't affect your argument fewer baseballers are criminals? Does that mean that now foreign-born players aren't role models to domestic kids?

I guess I'm confused by the argument (which is now far afield from A-Rod, but screw him, this is more interesting). Points of the argument as I read it while trying and failing to work instead of post about this:

1) MLB players are better role-models for kids because they commit fewer crimes, so we care more about the crimes they do commit, like steroid abuse, since they're supposed to be better role-models.

2) Far more crimes per capita, especially violent crimes, are committed by the inner-city, poverty-stricken blacks that play football than by the foreign-born, poverty-stricken Latinos that play baseball.

3) If 2 is not true, then it doesn't matter anyway because foreign-born Latinos are not Americans, and so are not role models to young Americans and not reflective of our societal norms anyway cuz they're from other countries.

4) So even if you account for the fact that there are twice as many NFL players so there should be twice as much crime, NFL players by default will HAVE to have a bunch more crime since we're counting all their players, but cherry-picking only white players and the 4% or whatever of black players still in the league that are American-born, like Milton Bradley.

5) All crimes are not equal, and DUI crimes are not considered violent crimes even though lives were endangered. Same with spousal-abuse crimes, because members of both sports commit them (though only one sport suspends players for them). Gun crimes and drug crimes are the only crimes that carry weight in the NFL vs MLB crime-stats throw-down, and since more NFL players commit gun crimes, football's obviously the more criminal sport.

Um...is that right?

Because 1) infers that ball-players are role-models across race, but then you discount that with 3). Kids apparently look up to baseball players more because they're not thugs, only they might be the same kinds of thugs except only in their own countries, which apparently doesn't matter to an 8 year old who only should care about a crime committed on his own soil.

If Martians were allowed to play baseball and they ate live babies, are kids supposed to still look up to them as role models because they only eat live babies in the offseason, while they're back on Mars, so Earth Morality really can't be applied to them? I mean, they do what they want on their planet, and we only care about what happens on this one with baggy-pantsed black kids, right? Martians aren't American, so their Martian ethics don't apply. In a global world where my 8 year old can talk to an 8 year old in China via teleconference in his classroom or on my home webcam and blogs carry news with instantaneous efficiency, I'd think jurisdictional ethics and morals are a little outmoded.

Or maybe 8 year olds should only look up to domestic-born players, even though foreign-born players dominate the popularity charts.

What exactly is it that you're advocating as far as role models in baseball? White guys - or at least domestically-raised athletes - who at the most "only" drink and drive or maybe beat their wives but don't do drugs or wave guns around, because guns and drugs are way worse than drinking and spousal abuse?

So Jeter hasn't gotten a DUI yet, but Joba Chamberlain has. Leyritz killed a woman while drunk driving, but he wasn't playing any more so that doesn't count, right? Jeter cheats on his girlfriends, but maybe they're not exclusive. A-Rod cheated on his wife and roided up, Johnny Damon cheated on his...

But there were no guns involved, so thank God the NYY and baseball are making sure to be such good role models for the kids.

It's not violent crime. Except for that pesky DUI death thing, I guess. As long as my kids make sure to follow the examples of the domestic-born people who cheat on their wives and cheat at their sport and drive drunk, it's okay. Just don't carry a gun or sling dope, son, and try not to hit anybody while driving all boozed up, because that's bad.

You believe baseball has a more moral player base. I don't. Maybe a bunch of foreign players and middle-class white kids don't wave around as many guns as poverty-born black ones, but that's hardly the only crime in the world, or the only dangerous act that can be undertaken by a sports figure.

I guess comparing the relative morality of the player bases just leaves me with the thought that Charles Barkley was right, and he is not a role model, and neither are many of the sports role models out there.

Admire their work ethic and their athletic prowess, but their off the field actions are always subject to doubt, and building them up to be heroes just leaves one with the ability to be disappointed by their eventual mortality. Regardless of the sport they play.

Are there role models in sports? You damn well better believe it. There are some amazing people out there doing amazing things for their communities and their sports. But choose them on an individual basis, from all available facts, not because of the sport they play or the country they come from, because that's the way to get let down when the criteria fails.

~G

Originally Posted by G_Money

Edit: As i read this over, it looks a little harsh, but I'm really not intending it to be. I'm finding this to be far more interesting at the moment than any other discussion we could be having, so try to give me some leeway in tone if it comes across too harshly. I'm enjoying the argument, not trying to pick a fight.

Though my ultimate goal is to cripple King's hands so that I win by default. Mwahahaha...

On with the argument.

~G



*blinks*

So you're really saying that foreign players committing crimes doesn't reflect on us, because they're foreign. So their crimes in their countries are not really of consequence to the argument that there are substantially more violent crimes and DUIs in the NFL than there are in MLB.

Carlos Guillen can get a DUI or two (and he has) but he isn't considered a criminal because he's foreign, which is why it doesn't affect your argument fewer baseballers are criminals? Does that mean that now foreign-born players aren't role models to domestic kids?

I guess I'm confused by the argument (which is now far afield from A-Rod, but screw him, this is more interesting). Points of the argument as I read it while trying and failing to work instead of post about this:

1) MLB players are better role-models for kids because they commit fewer crimes, so we care more about the crimes they do commit, like steroid abuse, since they're supposed to be better role-models.

2) Far more crimes per capita, especially violent crimes, are committed by the inner-city, poverty-stricken blacks that play football than by the foreign-born, poverty-stricken Latinos that play baseball.

3) If 2 is not true, then it doesn't matter anyway because foreign-born Latinos are not Americans, and so are not role models to young Americans and not reflective of our societal norms anyway cuz they're from other countries.

4) So even if you account for the fact that there are twice as many NFL players so there should be twice as much crime, NFL players by default will HAVE to have a bunch more crime since we're counting all their players, but cherry-picking only white players and the 4% or whatever of black players still in the league that are American-born, like Milton Bradley.

5) All crimes are not equal, and DUI crimes are not considered violent crimes even though lives were endangered. Same with spousal-abuse crimes, because members of both sports commit them (though only one sport suspends players for them). Gun crimes and drug crimes are the only crimes that carry weight in the NFL vs MLB crime-stats throw-down, and since more NFL players commit gun crimes, football's obviously the more criminal sport.

Um...is that right?

Because 1) infers that ball-players are role-models across race, but then you discount that with 3). Kids apparently look up to baseball players more because they're not thugs, only they might be the same kinds of thugs except only in their own countries, which apparently doesn't matter to an 8 year old who only should care about a crime committed on his own soil.

If Martians were allowed to play baseball and they ate live babies, are kids supposed to still look up to them as role models because they only eat live babies in the offseason, while they're back on Mars, so Earth Morality really can't be applied to them? I mean, they do what they want on their planet, and we only care about what happens on this one with baggy-pantsed black kids, right? Martians aren't American, so their Martian ethics don't apply. In a global world where my 8 year old can talk to an 8 year old in China via teleconference in his classroom or on my home webcam and blogs carry news with instantaneous efficiency, I'd think jurisdictional ethics and morals are a little outmoded.

Or maybe 8 year olds should only look up to domestic-born players, even though foreign-born players dominate the popularity charts.

What exactly is it that you're advocating as far as role models in baseball? White guys - or at least domestically-raised athletes - who at the most "only" drink and drive or maybe beat their wives but don't do drugs or wave guns around, because guns and drugs are way worse than drinking and spousal abuse?

So Jeter hasn't gotten a DUI yet, but Joba Chamberlain has. Leyritz killed a woman while drunk driving, but he wasn't playing any more so that doesn't count, right? Jeter cheats on his girlfriends, but maybe they're not exclusive. A-Rod cheated on his wife and roided up, Johnny Damon cheated on his...

But there were no guns involved, so thank God the NYY and baseball are making sure to be such good role models for the kids.

It's not violent crime. Except for that pesky DUI death thing, I guess. As long as my kids make sure to follow the examples of the domestic-born people who cheat on their wives and cheat at their sport and drive drunk, it's okay. Just don't carry a gun or sling dope, son, and try not to hit anybody while driving all boozed up, because that's bad.

You believe baseball has a more moral player base. I don't. Maybe a bunch of foreign players and middle-class white kids don't wave around as many guns as poverty-born black ones, but that's hardly the only crime in the world, or the only dangerous act that can be undertaken by a sports figure.

I guess comparing the relative morality of the player bases just leaves me with the thought that Charles Barkley was right, and he is not a role model, and neither are many of the sports role models out there.

Admire their work ethic and their athletic prowess, but their off the field actions are always subject to doubt, and building them up to be heroes just leaves one with the ability to be disappointed by their eventual mortality. Regardless of the sport they play.

Are there role models in sports? You damn well better believe it. There are some amazing people out there doing amazing things for their communities and their sports. But choose them on an individual basis, from all available facts, not because of the sport they play or the country they come from, because that's the way to get let down when the criteria fails.

~G

a little off topic, you're at work and you can write all this? I hope you're not a security guard.

Sorry G, I didn't read it all. It's that whole ADD thing. Anyway, I'm trying to think of a plausible reason why MLB players are henpecked more than NFL or NHL players for drug useage. Maybe because MLB isn't as good at covering it up?

Originally Posted by Devilspawn

By RONALD BLUM, AP Baseball Writer 28 minutes ago


All I read in that article were excuses and self doubt. Loosey goosey culture my ass. Under pressure my left foot. Needed to prove I was worth the contract my left nut.

We should get rid of him. He's going to receive the Charles Smith treatment, but worse.

Be honest:

Did you forgive Giambi and Pettitte?

I take it the ansewer is no. If not, how are you not a hypocrite?

If you didn't forgive Giambi and Pettitte, it would make sense to not forgive A-Rod.


Speaking for myself:

I forgave Giambi for saying 2 words "I'm sorry".

I forgave Pettitte despite his "I only used once.... OK, I only used twice..... OK, I only used _________" because an admission is an admission.

Using the same standard, I have no problem forgiving A-Rod. I'm not going to dissect his confession because I didn't dissect Andy's. All 3 lied and confessed only after getting caught. "No comment" doesn't work. Denial doesn't work. Just ask Bonds and Clemens.

I'm rooting for every player on my team.

Bonus question: I rooted for Romanowski because of his uniform despite the fact it was painfully obvious that he used steroids. Did you root against him when he was with the Raiders (at least up to the time he tried to kill one of his teammates)? Just curious.

I'm not going to preach to you or 420 (420 is too cute to preach to anyways ), just asking some questions and spelling out my stance:

1. A-Rod made a huge series of mistakes.

2. He lied.

3. The HR record will still belong to Hank Aaron no matter how many A-Rod hits. His entire career remains under as much suspicion as Bonds'. I can't pick and choose "Clean from _____ to _____", Dirty from 2001 to 2003, Clean from 2004 and beyond". I can't do that. I'll leave that for red sox fans to do that with Clemens.... "He was clean until he joined the Blue Jays". Ummmm hmmmmm. Suuuuurrrrre. How convenient.

4. A-Rod doesn't belong in the HOF. I won't acknowledge him if he's inducted.

5. I accept his apology, but he's just 1 of the 25 now. Were he not on my team, I wouldn't pay a bit of attention to him.

Originally Posted by CoachChaz

I pretty much expect to find that almost every athlete cheats in one way or another. It's part of the game and with so many of them out there, who can blame the rest for trying, just so they can level the playing field. Screw it...just legalize it all and see what happens.

Give us a seperate HOF and I could almost live with that. God, it sucks to say that.

Originally Posted by G_Money

Edit: As i read this over, it looks a little harsh, but I'm really not intending it to be. I'm finding this to be far more interesting at the moment than any other discussion we could be having, so try to give me some leeway in tone if it comes across too harshly. I'm enjoying the argument, not trying to pick a fight.

Though my ultimate goal is to cripple King's hands so that I win by default. Mwahahaha...

On with the argument.

~G



*blinks*

So you're really saying that foreign players committing crimes doesn't reflect on us, because they're foreign. So their crimes in their countries are not really of consequence to the argument that there are substantially more violent crimes and DUIs in the NFL than there are in MLB.

Yes. Because they do not reflect upon us as a country. They are not citizens of this country. It is not that their crimes are of no consequence, it is that they don't reflect upon us. I am not condoning their crimes.

Carlos Guillen can get a DUI or two (and he has) but he isn't considered a criminal because he's foreign, which is why it doesn't affect your argument fewer baseballers are criminals? Does that mean that now foreign-born players aren't role models to domestic kids?

Oh no, he's a criminal. But, he isn't our criminal. He does not reflect upon us as a country. I won't lie, I never have put much stock in the role model crap. My dad had it beaten into my mind that athletes are not role models. To quote an old Bengals head coach, Sam Wyche, "Athletes are not role models, hell, most of them need role models,". That doesn't take away from them actually being role models. I just like to rant about it.

But, how can they represent our country? They aren't even citizens of our country.

I guess I'm confused by the argument (which is now far afield from A-Rod, but screw him, this is more interesting). Points of the argument as I read it while trying and failing to work instead of post about this:

1) MLB players are better role-models for kids because they commit fewer crimes, so we care more about the crimes they do commit, like steroid abuse, since they're supposed to be better role-models.

I don't care about Steriods from the criminal perspective, not much. I am just arguing from the standpoint of what they do to the game. My one point about them being illegal was just to point out, more as a footnote than anything else, that when they were not "illegal" as far as MLB was concerned, they were still illegal under MLB's rule of "don't take drugs that are against the law,".

I would also point out that they are better role-models.

2) Far more crimes per capita, especially violent crimes, are committed by the inner-city, poverty-stricken blacks that play football than by the foreign-born, poverty-stricken Latinos that play baseball.

I don't know about all that. What I do know is that I don't count the crimes that MLB players and NFL players commit against either leagues if that crime is committed by a person who is not a legal citizen here. Now, if you take someone who isn't a citizen here, but basically lives here, I would count that against them. At that point they are actually living here. But when you get guys who bounce home (read, another country) nah, I don't.

3) If 2 is not true, then it doesn't matter anyway because foreign-born Latinos are not Americans, and so are not role models to young Americans and not reflective of our societal norms anyway cuz they're from other countries.

I think they would still count (unfortunately) as role models. But, I don't count them because I fail to see how someone who isn't American can reflect upon our society negatively.

4) So even if you account for the fact that there are twice as many NFL players so there should be twice as much crime, NFL players by default will HAVE to have a bunch more crime since we're counting all their players, but cherry-picking only white players and the 4% or whatever of black players still in the league that are American-born, like Milton Bradley.

1280= the amount of players in the MLB. 1696= the number of players in the NFL. I am a bit lost here. I'm not cherry picking anything. Point blank players in the NFL commit more crimes. At the very least NFL players commit more violent crimes.

5) All crimes are not equal, and DUI crimes are not considered violent crimes even though lives were endangered. Same with spousal-abuse crimes, because members of both sports commit them (though only one sport suspends players for them). Gun crimes and drug crimes are the only crimes that carry weight in the NFL vs MLB crime-stats throw-down, and since more NFL players commit gun crimes, football's obviously the more criminal sport.

Um...is that right?

DUI's were ruled by federal courts to not be a violent crime. So, yes. Inherently crimes are not equal. You can get put to death for some crimes. Some crimes require jail sentences, some require prison sentences. Some require fines, other tickets. There are tons of NFL players with DUI's. The problem is that the NFL is going to match or come close to matching the MLB with drug and DUI's. The MLB will then get blown out by the amount of violent crimes.

[Because 1) infers that ball-players are role-models across race, but then you discount that with 3). Kids apparently look up to baseball players more because they're not thugs, only they might be the same kinds of thugs except only in their own countries, which apparently doesn't matter to an 8 year old who only should care about a crime committed on his own soil.

All their actions will count. However, when you try to tell me that it is right to count the crimes that MLB players from other countries commit on their own soil, while not being citizens here, I don't get it. How? How do their actions reflect upon America? Hell, even if they did it here, how does it? If I go to China and I kill 4 people, does it reflect upon China? No, because I was just visiting and went crazy. I don't get it.

If Martians were allowed to play baseball and they ate live babies, are kids supposed to still look up to them as role models because they only eat live babies in the offseason, while they're back on Mars, so Earth Morality really can't be applied to them? I mean, they do what they want on their planet, and we only care about what happens on this one with baggy-pantsed black kids, right? Martians aren't American, so their Martian ethics don't apply. In a global world where my 8 year old can talk to an 8 year old in China via teleconference in his classroom or on my home webcam and blogs carry news with instantaneous efficiency, I'd think jurisdictional ethics and morals are a little outmoded.

That is so insane that I can't even respond to it. But look at the example I brought up with Pedro and Omar. People blasted them for attending dog fighting. I didn't, because it's a different culture. Them attending dog fights means nothing to me because of that.

Or maybe 8 year olds should only look up to domestic-born players, even though foreign-born players dominate the popularity charts.

8 year olds need to hear the Sam Wyche quote more often.

What exactly is it that you're advocating as far as role models in baseball? White guys - or at least domestically-raised athletes - who at the most "only" drink and drive or maybe beat their wives but don't do drugs or wave guns around, because guns and drugs are way worse than drinking and spousal abuse?

I'm advocating nothing. I don't think any athlete is a damn role model. All I said, is simply NFL has more crime, more violent crime. The MLB has less crime, less violent crime, and the culture is different.

So Jeter hasn't gotten a DUI yet, but Joba Chamberlain has. Leyritz killed a woman while drunk driving, but he wasn't playing any more so that doesn't count, right? Jeter cheats on his girlfriends, but maybe they're not exclusive. A-Rod cheated on his wife and roided up, Johnny Damon cheated on his...

Most people, especially kids don't know who Leyritz is. But you compare that to my 05 offseason Bengals who not only get DUIs, but pull guns, run from cops, beat their girlfriends, etc etc etc and it isn't even close. Hell, a few months after the Bengal outburst Jacksonville and SD were up there, and Jville eventually passed us. It isn't even close.

But there were no guns involved, so thank God the NYY and baseball are making sure to be such good role models for the kids.

Actually, most of the guys on the Yankees are choir boys compared to a lot of other athletes. Oh, especially when you compare them to NFL players...hold on, that reminds me of a debate I had with.....oh crap we're doing that now.

It's not violent crime. Except for that pesky DUI death thing, I guess. As long as my kids make sure to follow the examples of the domestic-born people who cheat on their wives and cheat at their sport and drive drunk, it's okay. Just don't carry a gun or sling dope, son, and try not to hit anybody while driving all boozed up, because that's bad.

Actually if I had to choose between my kids being alcoholics who cheat on their wives or gun and dope slinging guys....I would tell him to make sure that he buys good alcohol and to always wear a rubber.

You believe baseball has a more moral player base. I don't. Maybe a bunch of foreign players and middle-class white kids don't wave around as many guns as poverty-born black ones, but that's hardly the only crime in the world, or the only dangerous act that can be undertaken by a sports figure.

Crimes are not equal. Yes, MAYBE (and I STILL doubt it) the MLB has more crime, but the NFL sports a lot more of the worst kinds of crimes.

I guess comparing the relative morality of the player bases just leaves me with the thought that Charles Barkley was right, and he is not a role model, and neither are many of the sports role models out there.

Sam Wyche baby.

Admire their work ethic and their athletic prowess, but their off the field actions are always subject to doubt, and building them up to be heroes just leaves one with the ability to be disappointed by their eventual mortality. Regardless of the sport they play.

Exactly. They are not role models. Hell, most of them need...did I ever tell you about a guy named Sam Wyche?

Are there role models in sports? You damn well better believe it. There are some amazing people out there doing amazing things for their communities and their sports. But choose them on an individual basis, from all available facts, not because of the sport they play or the country they come from, because that's the way to get let down when the criteria fails.

~G

Athletes are only role models because parents fail. Let me reiterate this one last time; actions that people take who are not Americans do not reflect upon America. If you flip it and have some Latin dude bounce out of the country in the off-season and you give him credit for building a hospital, you give him credit. Maybe his COUNTRY gets some of the credit. But, I sure as hell never saw anyone give America any of Dikembe Mutombo's credit.