mattmatik Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 i thought McGwire used legal supplements? But if he juiced it too take his panzy ass outta the HOF too. Bonds is a joke and so are all the people who defended him and said he didnt juice it up. LOL at all of you. 585062275[/snapback] Who has said he didn't "juice it up"? I don't think anyone has ever defended him on that, and besides, that wasn't the question. The question is, should he be allowed in the Hall of Fame? I think he knew what he was doing. But, I don't think he's been doing it for very long, whereas his numbers have been consistent for 11 years. I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the fact that he couldn't even throw Sid Bream out at home in the '92 NLCS. :devil: Like I said before, many a baseball player has taken steroids and nobody has been able to reach the kind of production Bonds has. I think people give too much credit to the steroids - it doesn't make you see the ball better, it doesn't help you to NOT swing at bad pitches (there is a reason his average is so high, he simply doesn't swing at crap pitches). Plus, he still has that high-pitched, girly voice. Anyone care to estimate the number of NFL players using? Nobody says anything about that. Why? Gambling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imtoomuch Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 Yes, he should. I'll add to the steriods debate by quoting SI: "The more intriguing number comes from Stats Inc., which reports that Bonds had never hit a home run longer than 450 feet before the 2000 season, when he turned 36. Since then, he's hit at least 21 homers of 450 feet or farther. Where can the 10 Spot sign up for flaxseed oil? That stuff is obviously dynamite." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WitCh-Fire Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 if they could determimne when he started using, allow those records to count, up til that point. after that, wipe everything. yeah, all those guys mcquire, bonds, went from being normal sized (and this was already in their prime age) to absolutely humongous...it just never seemed normal. either way, it's really disappointing. you know they know it's steroids, they have to know it's wrong, but apparently the rules and the game don't apply to them. 585062603[/snapback] That would put a Very Nice scare into most of the major players. "Dont cheat, Otherwise when we determine when you started using, your scores get whiped to that point." Now that would scare the willeys outta them :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattmatik Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 Yes, he should. I'll add to the steriods debate by quoting SI: "The more intriguing number comes from Stats Inc., which reports that Bonds had never hit a home run longer than 450 feet before the 2000 season, when he turned 36. Since then, he's hit at least 21 homers of 450 feet or farther. Where can the 10 Spot sign up for flaxseed oil? That stuff is obviously dynamite." 585063687[/snapback] Ok, it helps you hit it LONGER, but it doesn't hit it FOR you. If 2000 is the year in questions...for 7 years before that he hit between 35-45 home runs every year. That's damn impressive, especially for someone who played half his games in Candlestick Park. Maybe the ball is juiced? Maybe pitchers just suck now. Could be alot of reasons...including the steroids. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincent Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 Hang them both by there nuts, hes guilty theres no point for this thread to go on :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamthief Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 I dont know bout baseball, but look at Maradona in football (soccer, whatever you want to call it). He was inducted into the Hall of Fame even with his involvement with drugs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aem4162 Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 Should Barry be in the Hall of Fame? Should Bonds be banned from the HOF? which question is it? the thread title asks if he should be in the hof and the question asks if he should be banned from the hof. i voted thinking the title would be the same as the poll question. they're 2 completely diff questions. a mod needs to fix the wording. NO - he doesn't belong in the hof YES - he should be banned from the hof Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imtoomuch Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 Ok, it helps you hit it LONGER, but it doesn't hit it FOR you. If 2000 is the year in questions...for 7 years before that he hit between 35-45 home runs every year. That's damn impressive, especially for someone who played half his games in Candlestick Park. Maybe the ball is juiced? Maybe pitchers just suck now. Could be alot of reasons...including the steroids. ;) 585063702[/snapback] Exactly. He couldn't even hit 50 before, but now he can hit 70+. It doesn't add up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicoCahill Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 yes, but i also believe that pete rose should be in the hall of fame for his on the field accomplishments Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpaul1104 Posted December 8, 2004 Author Share Posted December 8, 2004 Ok, it helps you hit it LONGER, but it doesn't hit it FOR you. If 2000 is the year in questions...for 7 years before that he hit between 35-45 home runs every year. That's damn impressive, especially for someone who played half his games in Candlestick Park. Maybe the ball is juiced? Maybe pitchers just suck now. Could be alot of reasons...including the steroids. ;) 585063702[/snapback] if your wife cheated and went against the rules of your marriage, would you be so quick to defend her? A cheater shouldn't even be recognized, let alone honored or enshrined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpaul1104 Posted December 8, 2004 Author Share Posted December 8, 2004 Banned from the hall of fame, yes. Banned from baseball, no. I think any accumulated records past present or future obtained through use of steriods should be expunged. But until formal rules are set on the matter, I don't think he should be banned from playing. 585062291[/snapback] Pete Rose is banned from baseball because he "Compromised the integrity of the game." Does cheating, or using a banned substance (steroid use has clearly been defined as cheating) compromise the integrity of the game? Whats worse yet is that what Pete Rose is banned for in no way contributed to the numbers that make him deserving of being in the hall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
someguy123 Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 Pete Rose is banned from baseball because he "Compromised the integrity of the game." Does cheating, or using a banned substance (steroid use has clearly been defined as cheating) compromise the integrity of the game? 585065273[/snapback] i think berry bonds sohuld be banned from all sports for life. :crazy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerLG Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 As much as I dislike Barry Bonds, I do not think you can keep him out of the Hall of Fame. Yes, he did cheat, but so did Gaylord Perry and he won over 300 games. The difference between Bonds and Rose is this, Rose could affect the outcome of any game by what he did. I do think Barry's records should be stricken, but he was going to be a Hall of Famer before he started taking that stuff he didn't know what it was. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABC Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 BABE RUTH Holy fock man. Of course he SHOULD not be in the hall of fame. Fock him if you ask me, drugs ARE illegal and boost the ability(ies). That's not talent at all! About Babe Ruth now, THAT guy is someone with talent. Hitting the ball was in is blood! Look at he is way of life : 1- Fat because of beer; 2- Was eating ONLY fast food; 3- Very tin legs and was running like a grand-ma; 4- No physical exercise of gym; (except for aving sex) Back then, some players needed to have a second job during vacation. If you were to practice during vacation, other players & newspapers would be laughing at them. Now, look at those "athletes" of nowadays : 1- Big and strong muscles; 2- Very strict alimention; 3- Big arms and big legs; 4- Gym 4 hours a day even in vacation (can drop to 2 hours during vacation). Drugs are now invading the amateur area and it's consider normal if you want to perform and become good, argg to become RICH. ABC and a half! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpaul1104 Posted December 8, 2004 Author Share Posted December 8, 2004 (edited) As much as I dislike Barry Bonds, I do not think you can keep him out of the Hall of Fame.? Yes, he did cheat, but so did Gaylord Perry and he won over 300 games.? The difference between Bonds and Rose is this, Rose could affect the outcome of any game by what he did.? I do think Barry's records should be stricken, but he was going to be a Hall of Famer before he started taking that stuff he didn't know what it was;)? ;) 585065338[/snapback] Pete Rose could NOT affect the outcome of any game! Managerial decisions do not physically impact anything. Even if he bet as a player, he cannot determine what the other 17 people involved are going to do! Edited December 8, 2004 by cpaul1104 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hills420 Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 I don't think so... steriod use should be condemned, not celebrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpaul1104 Posted December 8, 2004 Author Share Posted December 8, 2004 Pete Rose could NOT affect the outcome of any game! Managerial decisions do not physically impact anything. Even if he bet as a player, he cannot determine what the other 17 people involved are going to do! 585065436[/snapback] In 2003 Barry Bonds affected the outcome of at least 73 games!! Or however many games he actually hit a home run in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerLG Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 In 2003 Barry Bonds affected the outcome of at least 73 games!! Or however many games he actually hit a home run in. 585065543[/snapback] Um, just because someone hits a homerun does not mean a team wins. A manager's decision can affect the outcome. Keeping a pitcher in too long. Calling for a steal when you know the player will be thrown out. Not having players set in proper position for a certain hitter. Manager's make decisions all the time in baseball, they don't just sit there and eat sunflower seeds. He also had access to inside info about injuries and other game related things. For a batter to affect an outcome, the must come to the plate in the right situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+StevoFC MVC Posted December 8, 2004 MVC Share Posted December 8, 2004 i think he should be in the hall of fame. his stats before he even started with steroids would be enough to get him in so it really should have no effect on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
autodefe Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 To all you naysayers; Someone who actually did his homework: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story...oenfield/041207 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
htimsneb Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 Sure steroids help you hit the ball farther but you still have to make contact. If you suck, no amount of roids will help you. Barry has talent, he just hit the ball a little further than the next guy. Every ahtelete tries to gain some sort of competitive edge in order to win, what ever sport they are in. Swimmers shave their bodies. Tennis players get the best equipment. But is a sport where bats and balls are supposed to be uniform, all an athlete can do is make their body better. Barry got caught and shame on him, but like I said earlier, you still have to hit the little 3 inch ball being hurled at you at 95+ mph, and he does that really well. Why else would he be the intentional walk leader? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L3thal Veteran Posted December 8, 2004 Veteran Share Posted December 8, 2004 His talent is natural. His father was a good hitter, and his mentor, Willie Mays, was a good hitter. Yes, he did take in steriods, but did that help him hit 73 homeruns? Absolutely not. If that were the case, then Giambi would've hit the same during his steroid years. We can now stop arguing if he's good or not, we all know Bonds is naturally good as his stats throughout the years show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circaflex Posted December 9, 2004 Share Posted December 9, 2004 (edited) Pete Rose is banned from baseball because he "Compromised the integrity of the game." Does cheating, or using a banned substance (steroid use has clearly been defined as cheating) compromise the integrity of the game?? Whats worse yet is that what Pete Rose is banned for in no way contributed to the numbers that make him deserving of being in the hall. 585065273[/snapback] couldnt agree more man i talked with a few friends and if barry is still let in and rose isnt thats just a load of bullcrap Obviously you guys havent ever played baseball? If your big and strong and make some contact the ball is going a long way, those few that wouldnt have made it out do, sure he has some talent BUT with the help of roids he was stronger and able to put more balls out of the park. And the guy who said baseball has uniform equipment is wrong, different bat types, different wood, thinner handle, larger sweet spot, tapered handles. And im sure he was on them to break the 70+hr record, he hit waht 40/45 the years before, you shouldnt jump 30 in a season. Edited December 9, 2004 by Circaflex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpaul1104 Posted December 9, 2004 Author Share Posted December 9, 2004 Um, just because someone hits a homerun does not mean a team wins. A manager's decision can affect the outcome. Keeping a pitcher in too long. Calling for a steal when you know the player will be thrown out. Not having players set in proper position for a certain hitter. Manager's make decisions all the time in baseball, they don't just sit there and eat sunflower seeds. He also had access to inside info about injuries and other game related things. For a batter to affect an outcome, the must come to the plate in the right situation. 585066436[/snapback] When a homerun is hit a run is scored. Every run scored affects the outcome of a game, each individual run may not determine a winner, but it affects the outcome. A run is not scored when a pitcher is taken out!(or sent out to start another inning) or a stolen base is attempted. Sure it may potentially change the outcome, but it does not automatically put runs on the board like a homerun does! A batter can affect an outcome at any time in the game! Does a first pitch of the game homerun not affect the outcome in a 1-0 game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpaul1104 Posted December 9, 2004 Author Share Posted December 9, 2004 Sure steroids help you hit the ball farther but you still have to make contact. If you suck, no amount of roids will help you. Barry has talent, he just hit the ball a little further than the next guy. Every ahtelete tries to gain some sort of competitive edge in order to win, what ever sport they are in. Swimmers shave their bodies. Tennis players get the best equipment. But is a sport where bats and balls are supposed to be uniform, all an athlete can do is make their body better. Barry got caught and shame on him, but like I said earlier, you still have to hit the little 3 inch ball being hurled at you at 95+ mph, and he does that really well. Why else would he be the intentional walk leader? 585066563[/snapback] Yes every athlete tries to "gain a competetive edge in order to win". That is exactly why rules are put in place! To keep a level playing field. If you break the rules, you have an UNFAIR advantage over everyone else!!! Whether or not you were already good is irrelevant. If Barry slides on this they should change the rule book to the "Book of things we suggest you dont do, but can if you want". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts