Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The Official Mitchell Report Thread
- Thread starter IJ Reilly
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You're right, aloofman, I misunderstood what you were saying. Sorry. As I said, I think, at a minimum, all the clubs purposely closed their eyes to what was going on.
LOL, think how we feel up here about the three year contract the Giants gave to Marvin Bernard. Marvin FREAKIN' Bernard!And finally, it confirms what a crappy signing Todd Hundley was.
I'd post his real middle name, but I'd get banned.
What respect did Mitchell get from the MLBPA? I know of only one player Mitchell talked to during his investigation and that was at the urging of who? Selig. For all the players named, he didn't talk to any of them. And you know what? It's not his fault. Like I said in my last response, there was no drug testing in baseball during the 90s. The postseason was canceled in '94 because the Players didn't want a salary cap. If you think drug testing was going to come in because of rumors, because that's all there was back then, you're crazy. The people who knew weren't talking and still aren't talking. If it weren't for two trainers who had to comply to his questioning, he'd have nothing to report. The same thing Selig had all throughout his tenure as commissioner. Drug testing didn't even get in without random testing where you couldn't reveal who failed a test and even that was only because the government got involved. I'm not saying Selig's done a great job but with steroids he did what he could.
It's great to take this 'steroids bad' attitude now (which it is) but the voices complaining then were few and far between drowned out by the cheers for each ball that flew out of the park especially during 'the Chase.' And I'm not going to blame Selig for that.
When you watch baseball, and see a player performing exceptionally well, just think of him as natural talent with a little help (HGH) which is still undetectable, which is what I really gathered from Mitchell's report.
Well maybe I am crazy, but I believe that management, ownership and the players conspired to avert their eyes from a known drug problem, and chief among those in denial was Selig. Other sports addressed this issue far more comprehensively years ago. Perfectly? Of course not -- but at least they've made a real effort. How did they manage that, I wonder. By contrast, MLB allowed the player's union to have its way with a nod-and-a-wink, because drug use was of value to both the owners and the players at a time when baseball was in the dumps in the minds of the fans. They all took the most expedient way out. Now they bill comes due, with interest. Let the backlash begin.
You may never agree with me that Bud Selig is about the worst thing to happen to baseball in the last 50 years, but I firmly believe it. Sure, the events of '94 were complicated, but they may not have become so dire if Selig was protecting the integrity of the game, instead of acting as the owner's mouthpiece, which is all he as ever been in my opinion. As I say, I think we forget why the Commissioner of Baseball was created. Sadder yet, maybe Bud Selig has succeeded in completely erasing that memory.
Chief? How about chief among them were the players?
Drug use was of value to players, owners, writers and fans. Oh yes, yes, the writers and fans. If you're going to cast blame, blame everybody. This is tantamount to scapegoating, as if Selig is the main problem, when he isn't. Steroids, performance enhancers and such aren't a one-man problem.
I haven't forgotten why baseball has commissioner and his first duty is to oversee the operation of the game, which becomes priority number one when there is a strike. The NFL began drug testing in 87, the NBA in 83, if you want to blame a baseball commissioner you can start with Peter Ueberroth or Bowie Kuhn, both commissioners when the NFL and NBA began their programs, respectively, or anyone that's followed after but to throw this all on Selig is ridiculous.
He disclosed that in the report:
You just need to stop trying to take shots at the Red Sox at every chance. They won, the Yankees choked. Get over it.
You need to remember that the trainer would be charged with a felony, making false statements, if he lied at any point during his interview with Mitchell.
I certainly can't say I trust Canseco. Has he even met A-Rod?
At least he's man enough to admit it, unlike Clemens.
Honestly, I don't see the huge deal with using HGH to recover from an injury. Using it to better your performance when you're not injured is ********, but if you're injured you should be able to take drugs to make you better.
His situation is basically the same as Rodney Harrison's was. Rodney used it to recover from blowing out three ligaments in his knee.
Pretty nice visual breakdown of the various parties and their PED spans:
http://www.baseballssteroidera.com/
http://www.baseballssteroidera.com/
The whole point of steroid use is to help one recover from the stress and strain exercise puts on the body. It is meant to promote healing, and does a good job at it, allowing people to exercise more frequently and build muscle mass quicker than without it. The problem is that it also has other effects on the body. So, if you think HGH use to recover from injury is ok, then why not steroid use to recover from the damage done by exercise or game play?
fotografica, your link is a good resource, but I notice it is wrong about Bonds. Barry has never confirmed he has used the clear and the cream. In his testimony before the grand jury he admitted to taking substances openly in the Giants clubhouse that met the description of the "clear" and the "cream," but that is not the same thing. It is his contention, believable or not, that if the stuff he took was the clear and cream he did not know it.
I clearly haven't "thrown it all on Selig." The first sentence of my post should make the incorrectness of that characterization very apparent. And everything which follows, in fact. I thought I was being completely clear that I am not interested in scapegoating anyone. I put Selig at the top of my long hit-list because he was the one person who could have done something about the situation, the one person who's got such things in his job description.
Perhaps you do forget why the Commissioner's office was created. It wasn't to look after the "operations of the game," but to look after the integrity of the game. The situation in 1920 wasn't so different than the situation today: the game was seen as tainted by gambling and other issues. The owners realized that they needed an arbiter, or the game would be destroyed from within. For nearly 25 years Kennesaw Mountain Landis lorded over the game with an iron fist. He was controversial, and a lot of people hated him -- but he was independent and did his job, and very possibly saved the game in the process.
We've seen a lot of failed Commissioners since then, but that does excuse Bud Selig his failings. The fact that he shirked his duty as Commissioner is made very evident by the Mitchell Report.
Sorry, your description of "chief among" sounded like you laying it all at his feet. Yes there were others to blame but first you blame Selig. We differ. I don't blame him first. Either way, the commissioner's job is to look over the operation of the sport, look it up anywhere for any commissioner of any sport.
And you're right, Selig could have done many things to curb the steroid use. He could've suspended or fined players, whole ball clubs even and it wouldn't even need to be against the rules of baseball for him to do that, so great are the commissioner's powers, I looked them up. He can ban steroids and take action against those he suspects but he can't force testing on the players. So when Lenny Dykstra shows up to spring training having gained 30 lbs. of muscle in the offseason the commissioner can suspend him or when Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa are chasing Maris' home run record, he can suspend them both because it's suspicious how bulked up and home run happy they are. In Bonds' leaked grand jury testimony he all but admits to using steroids, so he could've suspended him too, hopefully he would have already suspended McGwire or we'd never hear the end of baseball and racism. Two thousand and how many consecutive starts? The wear and tear of the game doesn't seem to be taking a toll on him like it is the other players, Ripken, suspended. The Atlanta Braves made it to the NLCS 8 consecutive times with 14 consecutive post-season appearances, more than my beloved Yankees and their 13 season streak, well, suspend and fine management and ownership, must be something wrong there. He can look at Roger and suspend him since he should be retired anyway and criss-cross the league and gut whole ball teams all in the name of saving the game from itself. Yes, this is true, this is within his power.
By the way Major League Baseball suspended Jose Guillen for receiving HGH then the MLBPA filed a grievance on his behalf. And this is with rules banning the substance in place. Let's see how that works itself out.
I respectfully disagree, but at least we're more or less on the same page now.
I don't pretend to know the history of the commissioner's offices in other professional sports, but the mission of the Commissioner of Baseball is quite specific to the circumstances in baseball at the time of its creation. I saw the wording a few days ago, though I can't recall exactly where, but right in the Commissioner's job description is protecting the integrity of the game. The reason Selig floats to the top of my blame list (the top, not alone), is because of his failure to do just that. A study like the Mitchell Report could have been commissioned ten years ago, and should have been. The player's union could not have stood in the way ten years ago any more than they stood in the way in 2007. Selig simply failed to act in a timely fashion to protect the integrity of the game. That's a firing offense, IMO -- not that I kid myself about this happening.
Good news: we didn't waste much money on F.P. Santangelo.
Bad news: he was already off the juice by then.
I think it's much worse than that. Most of them weren't averting their eyes, they were aware and using it to their advantage.
Point taken. Another way of saying the same thing, really. It's difficult to avert your eyes from something you don't know is happening -- you won't know where not to look.
That's true and that's why it's going to be so difficult to just give the named players amnesty and move on.
The owners, union and powers that be have already shown that they can't be trusted. This wasn't a matter of things slipping through the cracks or simple ignorance, which could be forgiven, it was deceit of the fans, the very public that buys the tickets and pays the player's salaries.
What did baseball fans get in return for their money and attention after the player's strike? A manufactured home run chase. A tarnished single season and all time home run record. Decades worth of speculation and questions that will never be answered.
If the intention to deceive wasn't so strong, this would be much easier to deal with.
The problem with doing this report 10 years ago is the two trainers who talked to Mitchell wouldn't have had incentive to talk back then and the MLBPA would tell their members not to talk. I don't see why they wouldn't have done so 10 years ago, the players liked the owners even less then. So the report would have nothing to report. To break this story you need some one to talk and no one was talking.
Manufactured home run chase? As if MLB said 'you and you start hitting home runs.' The better term would be tainted.
And if my memory serves me, the home run records are Bonds 73, McGwire 70, Sosa 68, McGwire 65, Sosa 63, I believe those are the top five slots in order. And I don't know what speculation you mean, I basically consider any athlete performing above the level of other athletes to be making something unless a blood test says otherwise.
Good point, but I have ask why they are talking now. They are talking now because they are under indictment. That probably could have happened ten years ago, too.
I mean manufactured by the players themselves using questionable means. Also, manufactured by MLB in that after the first record runs after the strike, nearly all their marketing focused on home runs and "the long ball" unlike pre-strike years, obviously trying to get fans interested in record chases.
As for the the numbers you quote, you can't possibly be saying you've never heard anyone question validity of those home run total before. That's the speculation I was referring to.
Yea, that's true. But I think everything as far as investigations and all that started happening around the turn of the century. I mean, remember when athletes used say they weren't taking steroids and it was just hard work and rigorous training we used to believe them. Now if you're accused people think you did it.
Baseball has home runs, football has deep passes, basketball has the slam dunk. I mean the average fan that watches baseball isn't watching to see a team manufacture runs one hit at a time, advancing players with bunts, base steals, the subtle mental game between batter and pitcher, no one wants to see a 4 runs walked in but a grand slam is great TV. Of course they're going to use it to market. And the home run chase was getting as much coverage as Ripken's quest to be baseball's new Ironman. It's no different than basketball. I don't get the fundamentals of basketball but I know it's more than what you see in an And 1 mixtape. I know people talk about and watch when one player scores 50+ points.
As for the numbers, what I meant was the top five slots are taking by three people many think are steroid abusers so what's to question? Either you think those are valid or you don't. You can't take them out of the record books, everybody knows that, but you either accept them or you don't. After those three is Maris and there used to be controversy about his record because he played in a longer season than Ruth, if memory serves me correctly.
Maybe, but we're still talking at least 7-8 years of inaction, by people who knew a lot more than they cared to admit until the pressure to acknowledge it became to much to ignore. I don't think it was the fans' responsibility to prosecute, if you get my meaning.
Well, Tom Brady's flirting with the single season TD record but you don't see NFL promos shouting it from the hilltops every commercial break.
MLB had ads featuring McGwire and Sosa and "Will They?" in April and May back in those years. I can understand marketing it, but they were milking it for all it was worth; and again, I don't have a problem with this, per se, but the fact that they knew something was up and turned a blind eye to it is what's being questioned.
Your list has one player from the 60s that hit x number of home runs, then 35 years of no one coming close, then suddenly every year people are breaking the previous year's record? And when steroid and HGH investigations start, we're back to pre-1995 levels?
WASHINGTON -- Congressional lawmakers announced plans Tuesday to review the use of performance-enhancing drugs, with star-studded hearings scheduled next month and legislation to limit access to steroids and growth hormones.
Two House panels are planning mid-January hearings featuring former Sen. George Mitchell, author of a bombshell report last week that linked more than 80 players to the illegal use of steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs. Baseball players, likely some of those named in the report, could be invited to testify as well.
Meanwhile, a Senate Republican and Democrat on Tuesday announced legislation to limit access to those substances and stiffen criminal penalties for abuse and distribution.
Central to that effort is cracking down on the abuse of human growth hormone, or HGH, a drug for which there is no reliable test, said its sponsor.
The bill by Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., would classify HGH as a "Schedule III" substance, equating it legally with anabolic steroids and bringing it under the watch of the Drug Enforcement Administration.
That would mean that possession of HGH, a naturally occurring hormone approved by the FDA for treatment of some medical conditions, would be illegal without a current, valid prescription. Penalty for possession could be as high as three years in prison and even higher for illegal manufacture or distribution.
A second proposal by Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, would make it illegal to sell dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) to anyone under 18. DHEA is a naturally occurring precursor to testosterone and a dietary supplement that some athletes are using as an alternative to illegal anabolic steroids, Grassley said.
Two House panels, meanwhile, are planning hearings on the Mitchell report.
The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform has announced a hearing on the matter Jan. 15. Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and ranking Republican Tom Davis of Virginia said they will invite Mitchell, baseball Commissioner Bud Selig and Doug Fehr, president of the Major League Players Association, to testify.
Rep. Bobby Rush, chairman of the subcommittee on commerce, trade and consumer protection, has scheduled proceedings for Jan. 23. Mitchell will be invited to testify as will other members of Major League Baseball, a spokesman said.
Mitchell's report implicated seven former MVPs and more than 80 players in all.
A former Democratic Senate Majority Leader who retired in 1995, Mitchell, 74, has said he will soon undergo treatment for prostate cancer, an illness he made public in August.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3159935
Two House panels are planning mid-January hearings featuring former Sen. George Mitchell, author of a bombshell report last week that linked more than 80 players to the illegal use of steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs. Baseball players, likely some of those named in the report, could be invited to testify as well.
Meanwhile, a Senate Republican and Democrat on Tuesday announced legislation to limit access to those substances and stiffen criminal penalties for abuse and distribution.
Central to that effort is cracking down on the abuse of human growth hormone, or HGH, a drug for which there is no reliable test, said its sponsor.
The bill by Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., would classify HGH as a "Schedule III" substance, equating it legally with anabolic steroids and bringing it under the watch of the Drug Enforcement Administration.
That would mean that possession of HGH, a naturally occurring hormone approved by the FDA for treatment of some medical conditions, would be illegal without a current, valid prescription. Penalty for possession could be as high as three years in prison and even higher for illegal manufacture or distribution.
A second proposal by Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, would make it illegal to sell dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) to anyone under 18. DHEA is a naturally occurring precursor to testosterone and a dietary supplement that some athletes are using as an alternative to illegal anabolic steroids, Grassley said.
Two House panels, meanwhile, are planning hearings on the Mitchell report.
The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform has announced a hearing on the matter Jan. 15. Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and ranking Republican Tom Davis of Virginia said they will invite Mitchell, baseball Commissioner Bud Selig and Doug Fehr, president of the Major League Players Association, to testify.
Rep. Bobby Rush, chairman of the subcommittee on commerce, trade and consumer protection, has scheduled proceedings for Jan. 23. Mitchell will be invited to testify as will other members of Major League Baseball, a spokesman said.
Mitchell's report implicated seven former MVPs and more than 80 players in all.
A former Democratic Senate Majority Leader who retired in 1995, Mitchell, 74, has said he will soon undergo treatment for prostate cancer, an illness he made public in August.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3159935
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3163602
Don't expect Roger Clemens to make his first on-camera statements about accusations of his steroid use before a Congressional hearing next month. Or any other player for that matter.
None of the 86 players mentioned in the Mitchell report released last week are expected to speak at a Jan. 15 hearing on steroids before the House Government Reform Committee, according to a published report.
"We don't want to turn this into a circus," Rep. Tom Davis told USA Today. "We just want to know what Major League Baseball plans to do about their problems. We understand the collective bargaining agreement complicates matters, but we'd like to see if they agree with Senator George Mitchell's recommendations, and move on."
Davis reiterated those comments Thursday on the Stephen A. Smith Show on ESPN radio, saying "no" to whether Clemens would come to Capitol Hill.
A few of the faces likely to grace Capitol Hill for January's hearings are Commissioner Bud Selig, MLB players union executive director Don Fehr, and Mitchell.
"If players believe they are wrongfully accused in the report," Davis told the paper, "they are welcome to volunteer and we'll take it under consideration. But as I understand it, all these players had a chance to cooperate [with Mitchell], and everyone declined to cooperate.
"So, to an extent, that's what they get."
Davis cautioned players about testifying, pointing out that they would be under oath and could face perjury charges if they are caught lying.
While the NHL has not been officially invited to take part in the hearings, NHL sources in Washington have told the league they can expect to be included.
The NHL took part in hearings both during and after the lockout. The fact politicians aren't rushing to ensure that the NHL is front and center in this latest round of discussions suggests they believe the NHL's drug testing policy is either adequate or the league doesn't have a significant problem with performance enhancing substances or both.
The NHL did more than 3,000 tests during the first two years of its drug testing policy and there was just one positive test, that belonging to Sean Hill then of the New York Islanders. Hill, now with the Minnesota Wild, was suspended for 20 games.
Don't expect Roger Clemens to make his first on-camera statements about accusations of his steroid use before a Congressional hearing next month. Or any other player for that matter.
None of the 86 players mentioned in the Mitchell report released last week are expected to speak at a Jan. 15 hearing on steroids before the House Government Reform Committee, according to a published report.
"We don't want to turn this into a circus," Rep. Tom Davis told USA Today. "We just want to know what Major League Baseball plans to do about their problems. We understand the collective bargaining agreement complicates matters, but we'd like to see if they agree with Senator George Mitchell's recommendations, and move on."
Davis reiterated those comments Thursday on the Stephen A. Smith Show on ESPN radio, saying "no" to whether Clemens would come to Capitol Hill.
A few of the faces likely to grace Capitol Hill for January's hearings are Commissioner Bud Selig, MLB players union executive director Don Fehr, and Mitchell.
"If players believe they are wrongfully accused in the report," Davis told the paper, "they are welcome to volunteer and we'll take it under consideration. But as I understand it, all these players had a chance to cooperate [with Mitchell], and everyone declined to cooperate.
"So, to an extent, that's what they get."
Davis cautioned players about testifying, pointing out that they would be under oath and could face perjury charges if they are caught lying.
While the NHL has not been officially invited to take part in the hearings, NHL sources in Washington have told the league they can expect to be included.
The NHL took part in hearings both during and after the lockout. The fact politicians aren't rushing to ensure that the NHL is front and center in this latest round of discussions suggests they believe the NHL's drug testing policy is either adequate or the league doesn't have a significant problem with performance enhancing substances or both.
The NHL did more than 3,000 tests during the first two years of its drug testing policy and there was just one positive test, that belonging to Sean Hill then of the New York Islanders. Hill, now with the Minnesota Wild, was suspended for 20 games.
And they didn't have those ads when Bonds was chasing either. What's your point? I'm not denying they profited. Everybody profited in some way. Football doesn't need to advertise that the Patriots are chasing the '72 Dolphins which makes Tom Brady's record is irrelevant. Its the single season passing TD record. That's like saying the most homeruns hit by a first baseman. Who cares? The single season homerun mark, much like the '72 dolphins, is iconic, it was big news when Maris and Mantle were chasing Ruth, it's big news when McGwire and Sosa were chasing Maris.
My list named everybody above Maris, which is three players. Out of everybody in baseball on or off steroids, on of off HGH, only three people broke the record and two of those people broke the record twice. So I'm not sure what point you're making. I'm not saying they didn't use, I'm saying those are the record holders, love it or hate it.
Thanks for your updates MacNut.