If you look beneath the surface of the “Steroids in Baseball” issue should we be all that surprised … are we being incredibly hypocritical in our condemnation of Barry Bonds? How many issues can you find that can bring together Senator Dole, Bonds, Clay Aikens, and a bunch of bimbos named Bambi?
Being sports most dislikable superstar, Barry Bonds is no ones choice to break the home run record. He has crafted an arrogant persona around himself that is the antithesis of how we want our super heroes to behave. His unpopularity is compounded by his incredible talent for hitting a baseball. His patience at the plate and batting eye are among the finest ever in baseball and neither are effected by the steroids. Statisticians would have to examine every home run he has hit since the steroids became an issue to see how many “cheap” ones have just cleared the fence over the outfielder’s outstretched glove … likely very few fit into that category.
Here is a man who treats his body as a finely tuned machine. He knows the nutritional content of everything he puts into his body. That he would “take” something he was not completely sure of is ludicrous. He knew what he was doing although his knowledge of the long-term effects is limited to what the BALCO guys could tell him. BALCO’s “field testing” is not quite on the level of Glaxo Smith Kline or Squibb. Victor Conte puts a spoonful in his cat’s water bowl … if the cat doesn’t grow a 5th leg or light up like a Christmas tree, he figures it’s good to go. Caveat emptor Barry and Jason.
I’ve discussed this subject with a number of people over the past few weeks. I have yet to find a soul who is concerned about the long-term effects on Bonds himself. Any/all of his appendages could fall off on his 50th birthday and no one will shed a tear … such is the antipathy felt for the guy by baseball fans. The “concerns” seem based in two areas.
(1) Does his use of “steroids” cheapen or negate sacred baseball records? Baseball’s “records” are as much a part of its place in American culture as the playing of the game itself.
(2) While no one gives a hoot about Barry (good riddance!) they are concerned that impressionable youth will follow suit, which absolutely will happen. Barry Bonds may/may not feel he is bullet proof … a 16 y/o high school athlete definitely thinks he is bulletproof.
Bonds has already been convicted in the court of public opinion. He can dedicate his life to finding who slipped the steroids in his flaxseed oil, like O.J. looking for Nicole’s killer, it won’t matter … he will be booed unmercifully from now on. Baseball really has no grounds for hindsight penalizing him. If he stays off “the juice” from now on and passes whatever testing is implemented he is entitled to whatever records he achieves.
Other athletes have already died from after effects of performance-enhancing drugs, Lyle Alzado comes to mind, but until it happens dramatically to someone near the prime of their career it will not deter others any more than a 65 y/o ex-NFLer on two artificial knees and arthritic hips.
Why are we shocked by risky “Extreme Makeovers” by anyone seeking to achieve a competitive advantage in any walk of life?
Does the Miss America pageant penalize anyone with breast enhancements? Would a young 
woman seeking a career as a Vegas showgirl or even as a dancer at a local nudie bar give herself every “advantage” via various enhancements? Do the immediate advantages of those “enhancements” override the possible long-term effect? Ask women who have had “boob jobs” go bad.
SSays readers know I hate “broad brushing” but I can pretty much say EVERY woman I have ever known says the phrase “she has had work done” with the same sarcastic tone of voice when describing other women. I’ve never understood that attitude. Why is “cosmetic surgery” any different than any form of cosmetic enhancement? A woman who has the skill and wherewithal to purchase and apply cosmetics, a personal trainer, et al has an advantage over other women who can’t … same goes for “having work done”.
Senator Elizabeth Dole has been a living “portrait of Dorian Gray” since her 2002 campaign versus Erkine Bowles. Always an “attractive woman” she obviously has had a series of nips and tucks to seemingly appear younger and more attractive. As the campaign proceeded, she seemed to be reversing the aging process before our eyes. That she was running against an ultimate nerd made her appearance even more of a competitive advantage. In her case, certainly Bowles could have countered with his own “makeover” had he chosen to do so. Erskine “done over” in a Sonny Crockett/Nash Bridges motif … the mind reels.
John Edwards’ wife was grossly overweight six months prior to his national campaigning in the primaries. Realizing it would likely be a factor, she underwent a “makeover” shedding considerable weight.
If “Looking Good” in face, form, and total appearance gives one an “advantage” in whatever the competitive marketplace even if it’s a corporate workplace or simply a “singles bar” then why is that different from an athlete seeking the same in the critical areas of his/her world. A career anchorman takes Rogaine to keep his hair and uses a tanning bed for a healthy look.
Clay Aikens’ story is another example. He had a fine singing voice but his ultra-nerd appearance limited his audience appeal. The American Idol folks used all their professional techniques to accentuate his appearance and make him a marketable entertainer. Is that “fair” to other unknowns with fine voices but lacking the resources that made Clay a star?
How many of you are currently taking Viagra, Cialis, or Levitra? No one really knows the long- term effects. Are these not “performance enhancing drugs”? Have you evaluated the short-term benefits versus “down the road”?
Mizzus Swagger loved her Metabolife with ephedra. Unlike the athletes who encountered life threatening issues with ephedra, she was not pushing her body to any “limits” and therefore was not liable for the bad side effects. She is quite perturbed by its removal from the marketplace. None of the appetite suppressants/metabolism accelerators without ephedra are anywhere near as effective.
The reality of any efforts to outlaw these chemical enhancements is similar to computer viruses. The “bad guys” like BALCO will always be working overtime to stay ahead of the “good guys” trying to catch them. There will always be a new generation of stuff available that beats the current “tests”.
Anywhere there is “competition” there will be competitors seeking “an edge”. From the soapbox derby to NASCAR, there are car mechanics working with the slightest tolerances to gain “that edge” with their machines.
A favorite personal story from world class professional buildbuilding … The Arnold Classic is one of bodybuilding’s “majors”. Professional bodybuilding has its list of outlawed substances similar to other sports. Several years ago a certain fellow “won” the judging competition. I was backstage and a friend of mine who is an IFBB official remarked “He’ll never cash the check. Tomorrow morning his urine sample will test positive and he’ll be disqualified.”
I said “if everyone knows it, why go thru the motions?” His answer was “without the pills, he doesn’t have a chance. At least, this way he might sneak by.”
Without BALCO would Barry Bonds have hit 50% less HRs the past five years and have no chance to pass Aaron? Would you “like” Bonds any more if he had gone “clean” and ended up with 600 HRs?
I am not advocating “cheating” but it is a reality in every form of competition. At the top of any competitive pyramid the differences are measured in inches and fractions of a second or a handful of votes … whatever separates #1 from #2 (or as Dale Earnhardt said “first loser”). What sways a blue chip recruit at the 11th hour … what got Texas the “competitive advantage” over Cal in the BCS voting?
We as a society will continue to use our own standards which are rooted in cynicism and blind loyalty … (1) If “we” do it, it’s “clever” … if “they” do it, it’s cheating.” … (2) If “we” lose then “they” must have cheated. Blame it on Diebold, Jim Knight, “the media”, steroids or AJ Davis’ pizza party (which may eventually outlive “the parade”).
I did read where one Tar Heel fan was blasting Bonds all to pieces while steadfastly defending UNC’s Marion Jones. The evidence against Jones being much stronger, but she is “ours” …
>>><<<
Swagger’s Stumper
Ara Parseghian’s most famous game was against what rival coach?
>>><<<
We took a few days off to do some reevaluating of the direction of these commentaries. You may not even notice the upcoming differences but there will be a redirection … our primary objective will remain “to be entertaining and interesting”. “Changing the course of history” and/or “alter man’s basic nature” will remain as secondary purposes.
Ocean’s 12 is NOT in the same league as the original.
Regardless of what standards you use … the recent Notre Dame fiasco was FAR more embarrassing than anything Dickie Baddour has ever done or been accused of doing. The heinous “Fat Cats” that engineered the trainwreck remain essentially anonymous to all but a few. Unbridled arrogance is considerably more destructive than mere bureaucratic bumbling.
T.A. By By … a surprise to no one. Flashes of greatness to be sure but never escaped the clouds of character and heart issues. Should never be mentioned in same sentence with Ted Brown to be sure. My fave TA run was game winner vs UVa in C-F in 2003.
We enjoyed the Dale Earnhardt TV-movie. Theresa probably had more to do with his ultimate superstar success than did his daddy.
