FB: Liberty League

[PBR...]

TDT pbr will be very surprised if there is some other list...that list was released early this morning on drudge and several other media outlets and pbr is in agreement 2 names that stuck out were pujols and damon...david bell? wtf he still looked like a twig and for him it was the unenhancing drug

['gro]

U89, your fantasy football stubbornness has paid off....

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3152148

[PBR...]

thx for the input gro.....pbr will have to take that into acct. when pbr plays u89 in the championship!!!

[Knightstalker]

Here is the full report
Mitchell Report

[PBR...]

ouch...phone records and canceled checks somebody is in deep doo doo...the pushers are snitching out the users....

[Frank Rossi]

Well, the Mitchell Report is out...and now I sit here saying to myself, "OK, NOW WHAT?!"

I mean, all these active players can't be suspended without actual drug tests.  The former players will possibly, but not definitely be affected in their run toward Cooperstown.  There's still trouble accurately testing for all types of performance-enhancing drugs, a term that still has no really concrete definition.  All we have is a stigma attaching to a group of players which is selective and not all-inclusive at the end of the day -- but a stigma applied to many isn't such a horrible stigma.

Unfortunately, I think the Mitchell Report will cause more muddle than solutions.  I was hoping for something more, I guess, and I'm a little disappointed by the reality now that the shoe has dropped.

[Touchdown Tommy]

Frank:  Go over to the Grand Hyatt and ask George the tough questions.  Report back to the LLPP, Inc. ASAP.  Otherwise I understand that Bud is holding a Presser at 4:30EST over at the Waldorf-Astoria.  Make it happen.

[Jonny Utah]

Well, the Mitchell Report is out...and now I sit here saying to myself, "OK, NOW WHAT?!"

I mean, all these active players can't be suspended without actual drug tests.  The former players will possibly, but not definitely be affected in their run toward Cooperstown.  There's still trouble accurately testing for all types of performance-enhancing drugs, a term that still has no really concrete definition.  All we have is a stigma attaching to a group of players which is selective and not all-inclusive at the end of the day -- but a stigma applied to many isn't such a horrible stigma.

Unfortunately, I think the Mitchell Report will cause more muddle than solutions.  I was hoping for something more, I guess, and I'm a little disappointed by the reality now that the shoe has dropped.

It would be tough since it is an "independent" investigation, although it probably has turned up some "conpiracy to commit drug violation" offenses with the canceled checks and phone records. 

Im sure the possession and steroid use charges can and will be thrown out (as they are/were in the Bonds case)

But the old drug buy/conspiracy stuff would be the only thing the players would have to worry about.

[Knightstalker]

Lets get back to official business.
NFL Cheerleaders
Some of the pics here make a good case for going to Jacksonville.

[Frank Rossi]

Well, the Mitchell Report is out...and now I sit here saying to myself, "OK, NOW WHAT?!"

I mean, all these active players can't be suspended without actual drug tests.  The former players will possibly, but not definitely be affected in their run toward Cooperstown.  There's still trouble accurately testing for all types of performance-enhancing drugs, a term that still has no really concrete definition.  All we have is a stigma attaching to a group of players which is selective and not all-inclusive at the end of the day -- but a stigma applied to many isn't such a horrible stigma.

Unfortunately, I think the Mitchell Report will cause more muddle than solutions.  I was hoping for something more, I guess, and I'm a little disappointed by the reality now that the shoe has dropped.

It would be tough since it is an "independent" investigation, although it probably has turned up some "conpiracy to commit drug violation" offenses with the canceled checks and phone records. 

Im sure the possession and steroid use charges can and will be thrown out (as they are/were in the Bonds case)

But the old drug buy/conspiracy stuff would be the only thing the players would have to worry about.

Most of the players implicated have no history really (at least publicly known history) that could lead to anything more than slaps on the wrist for the "crimes" they alledgedly committed -- as far as MLB penalties, the MLB would be forced to, as its steepest possible measure, suspend the players implicated for the equivalent of what a first-time offender would receive (but as I said before, I don't see how MLB can do much without actual drug tests -- the credibility of the "informants" has yet to be tested before any type of court; just one man named Mitchell and his merry men determined credibility here). 

The only player who this potentially hurts is Barry Bonds -- it might provide a pathway to more evidence against him in the existing court case.  However, I'd be surprised if the information obtained by Mitchell and the information held by the Feds wasn't the same information -- shared in this case.

The players that end up looking better are Mark McGwire and Jason Giambi -- it looks a lot more widespread than the days in which these players were being singled-out on Capitol Hill and/or the media.  My guess is that McGwire now has an EASIER time gaining entry into the Hall of Fame after this situation (remember, McGwire never lied on Capitol Hill -- he only testified that we need to look forward, no back).

I challenge someone to explain to me what the Mitchell Report is going to do to eliminate the drug problem in baseball and penalize players that may have "cheated" under the not-so-concrete rules.

[Knightstalker]

From what KS has been reading MLB could penalize players but it would have to be what the penality was at the time of the offense.  In other words if a player is implicated in the report for using steroids in 2000 would be subject to the penalties in place in 2000, which means no penalty. 
Also they do not need a test, they just need proof like they have for Gibbons and Guillien.  Of course they need to deal with the MLBPA appeals.

The best thing in KS opinion is to take what they have learned.  Work with people to close any loopholes in the testing and strictly enforce the rules from this point forward.

Or let them keep doing it and just enjoy the sideshow.

[superman57]

I mean is anyone trully suprised by anyone on the list... I mean come on we all knew Gagne was using

[Tags]

Here is a quick summary of all the players named in the report:

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/articles/2007/12/13/THE_LIST/

[maxpower]

Max posted this in E8PP but since the conversation is happening here he will post it again:

1) I regret that steroids have become a problem. That said, with the public's attention on it, and with the new disciplinary steps (weird though they may be) I think the problem is getting better.

2) This report seems totally arbitrary and baseless. The guy went around trying to get people to name names and, according to some reports, bullying them to do so.

3) Taking away peoples' records is sooooo stupid. We don't know how much steroids help, and without knowing everyone that did them (which we never will), taking away records or using an asterisk is purely picking on people because they happen to be more talented. So, if you use steroids and you suck, that's okay? How come no one wants to erase Matt Lawton's HRs from the record book?

4) Yes, they "cheated". So, why is this kind of cheating different than Kenny Rogers' cheating? How come Barry Bonds is being threatened with an asterisk, and Gaylord Perry can go around on book tours talking about the spitter and he's in the hall of fame. Whitey scuffed the ball. Ty Cobb slid spikes up. These are all ways of cheating.

I mean, book tours! The guy BRAGS about it! Players cheat every damn day. It's a (regrettable) part of the game. They will always find new ways to do it. Not to mention that whether using steroids at the time was "cheating" at all is very ambiguous.

5) Yes, it's illegal. So is cocaine. And driving drunk. Next.

6) Yes, it's a bad example for children. This argument is actually, to me, the only one that has any credence. The only discipline I would like to see handed out to these players is forcing them to go to schools to give lectures on not taking steroids or something like that.

7) I guess to summarize, I DON'T CARE about steroids and want to just MOVE ON. I don't want to know who did steroids, it doesn't matter to me. You can tell who the truly gifted athletes are, steroids or not. I will always be in awe of Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens. History is intelligent. We can look back at this time and think our own opinions of how much steroids helped certain players. But to take these people out of the Hall/asterisk is not the answer. The 90s players had advantages of steroids over history. Babe Ruth played in the no black people era. Bob Gibson pitched off a mound 10 feet high. Every era has its advantages and disadvantages, and people are smart enough to figure them out, we don't need Bud Selig telling us who is a good person and who is a good ballplayer and who is not. This is a black eye on the game and dragging it out, in ANY way, will only make it worse.

I don't care, I don't care, bring on 2008.

[union89]

KS was able to find this list.

No Ortiz or Manny but Damon, Varitek, Nomar, Trot Nixon, Clemens, Petite, Sheffield, Aaron Boone, Giambi and Farnsworth.  That is what KS can recall off the top of his head.

Just to clarify, this list was crap.........no Varitek or Nomar.....amoung others.

Ken Caminiti would do ANYTHING...that dood never met a drug he wouldn't try..........