By Rick Morris
The complete and utter humiliation visited upon Roger Clemens during the Congressional hearings this week vindicates all of us who have long seen he and Barry Bonds as flip sides of the same coin for the Steroid Era. For those like myself who were limited to watching excerpts of it later because we were unable to view it live, Jayson Stark's ESPN.com liveblog really drove home the nature of events all throughout that unique day.
I must say, though, that there seemed a vague note of sympathy shining through in Stark's writing in terms of the degradation being visited upon Clemens. If I was correct in detecting that, it was probably very similar to the sentiments of our Senior Editor Jason Jones, who was able to watch gavel-to-gavel coverage of the hearings. He described to me feeling the emotion that whatever Clemens might have done, it didn't merit that type of virtual anal probe in front of a national audience.
I disagree completely.
I don't believe that anything Clemens experienced this week amounts to anything more than a tiny slice of a karmic repayment for a career of conducting himself as a horse's arse, HGH/roids or no HGH/roids. Go ask Mike Piazza, the recipient of repeated attempted decapitations from this puffed-up bully, if he thinks the committee went too far.
For me, it's not a zero-sum question of whether Clemens is a vile cheater or whether Henry Waxman is a camera-addicted posturing egomaniac. For me, both notions are true.
While I find Stark's overall account to be outstanding and a perfect example of what can be captured both in the moment and for posterity in terms of liveblogging, I do question his belief that Clemens' statements were punctuated by believable intensity. It's all a matter of individual interpretation, but I found his occasional stammering and what I perceived to be a "Forced Angry Guy" manner of speech to be signs of insincerity.
In matters such as these, it's natural to come to the conclusion that nothing has been settled in the absence of any type of conclusive legal finding, but here too I disagree. The predecessor to this circus, the infamous 2005 Capitol Hill hearing, permanently branded Mark McGwire as a cheater in the court of public opinion based on his dissembling before the committee that day. If you glance at the public opinion polls this week, you'll see a similar dynamic at work with Clemens having been unalterably pronounced a cheater by the public based on his pathetic performance before Congress.
So tell me again why nothing was settled with these hearings?
Showing posts with label Barry Bonds. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barry Bonds. Show all posts
Sunday, February 17, 2008
Sunday, December 16, 2007
More thoughts on the Mitchell Report
By Rick Morris
^ It was pretty funny to see George W. Bush accepting the Mitchell Report pretty much without reservation -- not because of Dubya's former ownership of the Texas Rangers -- but because George Mitchell more than any other one man pretty much ran George H.W. Bush out of office. An insanely committed partisan, Mitchell constantly ran rings around the naive first President Bush, who was bipartisan to an extreme fault. Mitchell convinced Bush Senior to break the "no new taxes" pledge during budget negotiations, then used the capitulation as a battering ram to send the old man back to Maine in November of '92. So there was a lot of history between Mitchell and the Bush family that went unnoticed this week.
^ The idea of a "Rogues' Wing" at the Baseball Hall of Fame appears to be an idea whose time has come. Excluding Pete Rose, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and many others for their misdeeds seems a bit over the top inasmuch as we are likely to eventually find that a great many players transgressed against the game at one time or another. Put the players in a separate "shamed" part of the Hall of Fame and retroactively move Ty Cobb (for the scores of his antisocial acts), Cap Anson (for bearing such great responsibility for enforcing the "color line" in baseball), Gaylord Perry (proud admitted cheater) and other jerks and miscreants to this area. Problem solved.
^ The notion that the period from about 1994-2001 (give or take a bit on either end) is unique in the history of baseball -- with these numbers sticking out like a sore thumb in terms of the all-time record -- is historically illiterate. This period of time is much like the 1930s, the days of Jimmie Foxx, Al Simmons and the Phabulous Philadelphia As in terms of the offensive explosion. The game has also gone through periods of extreme pitching dominance. The superlative 1968 season for Bob Gibson and for pitchers as a whole helped to bring about the lowering of the pitchers' mound for the 1969 season and a period in baseball with more balance between pitching and offense. In short, something like "500 home runs" has never meant exactly the same thing in every era. Now, this is not to minimize the effects of PED cheating, merely to point out that the damage done to the game in this respect is not irreversible. We must simply view the numbers of this era through a different prism than for previous times in terms of ascertaining how players fit into the all-time history of the game.
^ Whatever else can be said about the failings of the Mitchell Report and Major League Baseball's handling of it (reliance on informants working for the federal government, acceptance of information with differing standards of accuracy), Major League Baseball is to be commended on a huge scale for embracing the need to thoroughly cover the story on their own website. We saw the opposite end of the spectrum recently, when we felt it necessary to chastise the NBA for initially squelching all mention on their website of the civil verdict against Isiah Thomas and the New York Knicks, and so our appreciation for MLB.com's coverage (including a blog completely devoted to all aspects of the story) is sincere.
^ It was pretty funny to see George W. Bush accepting the Mitchell Report pretty much without reservation -- not because of Dubya's former ownership of the Texas Rangers -- but because George Mitchell more than any other one man pretty much ran George H.W. Bush out of office. An insanely committed partisan, Mitchell constantly ran rings around the naive first President Bush, who was bipartisan to an extreme fault. Mitchell convinced Bush Senior to break the "no new taxes" pledge during budget negotiations, then used the capitulation as a battering ram to send the old man back to Maine in November of '92. So there was a lot of history between Mitchell and the Bush family that went unnoticed this week.
^ The idea of a "Rogues' Wing" at the Baseball Hall of Fame appears to be an idea whose time has come. Excluding Pete Rose, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and many others for their misdeeds seems a bit over the top inasmuch as we are likely to eventually find that a great many players transgressed against the game at one time or another. Put the players in a separate "shamed" part of the Hall of Fame and retroactively move Ty Cobb (for the scores of his antisocial acts), Cap Anson (for bearing such great responsibility for enforcing the "color line" in baseball), Gaylord Perry (proud admitted cheater) and other jerks and miscreants to this area. Problem solved.
^ The notion that the period from about 1994-2001 (give or take a bit on either end) is unique in the history of baseball -- with these numbers sticking out like a sore thumb in terms of the all-time record -- is historically illiterate. This period of time is much like the 1930s, the days of Jimmie Foxx, Al Simmons and the Phabulous Philadelphia As in terms of the offensive explosion. The game has also gone through periods of extreme pitching dominance. The superlative 1968 season for Bob Gibson and for pitchers as a whole helped to bring about the lowering of the pitchers' mound for the 1969 season and a period in baseball with more balance between pitching and offense. In short, something like "500 home runs" has never meant exactly the same thing in every era. Now, this is not to minimize the effects of PED cheating, merely to point out that the damage done to the game in this respect is not irreversible. We must simply view the numbers of this era through a different prism than for previous times in terms of ascertaining how players fit into the all-time history of the game.
^ Whatever else can be said about the failings of the Mitchell Report and Major League Baseball's handling of it (reliance on informants working for the federal government, acceptance of information with differing standards of accuracy), Major League Baseball is to be commended on a huge scale for embracing the need to thoroughly cover the story on their own website. We saw the opposite end of the spectrum recently, when we felt it necessary to chastise the NBA for initially squelching all mention on their website of the civil verdict against Isiah Thomas and the New York Knicks, and so our appreciation for MLB.com's coverage (including a blog completely devoted to all aspects of the story) is sincere.
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Goodness gracious! It's Roid-ger Clemens!
By Rick Morris
EDIT: Updated to provide a link listing the players involved in the report without combing through the entirety of the Mitchell Report.
The Mitchell Report has been released (you can read it here) and one note of the conventional wisdom appears true: everyone was at fault in the steroid era.
^ The players engaged in a macabre arms race which will see many of them end up deceased at an early age from their self-destructive, short-term conniving.
^ The owners and the commissioner counted the dollar receipts from the home run happiness and turned a blind eye to the issue.
^ The union has a lot of blood on its hands since it was their fanatical enabling that allowed the players to poison themselves. The association had the most power in the situation, but the owners put more importance on almost every other issue that was being collectively bargained.
We have also seen what I have always suspected about those frauds known as Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds: there is no true fountain of youth. In the entire history of baseball, players have not shown the dramatic improvement that these two "icons" posted in their late thirties and early forties. Although he was not a good general manager, maybe now history will be a bit kinder to Dan Duquette for letting Clemens walk out of Beantown. Duquette suspected that Clemens was washed up. It turns out that his best days weren't behind him -- but his best honest days were behind him.
EDIT: Updated to provide a link listing the players involved in the report without combing through the entirety of the Mitchell Report.
The Mitchell Report has been released (you can read it here) and one note of the conventional wisdom appears true: everyone was at fault in the steroid era.
^ The players engaged in a macabre arms race which will see many of them end up deceased at an early age from their self-destructive, short-term conniving.
^ The owners and the commissioner counted the dollar receipts from the home run happiness and turned a blind eye to the issue.
^ The union has a lot of blood on its hands since it was their fanatical enabling that allowed the players to poison themselves. The association had the most power in the situation, but the owners put more importance on almost every other issue that was being collectively bargained.
We have also seen what I have always suspected about those frauds known as Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds: there is no true fountain of youth. In the entire history of baseball, players have not shown the dramatic improvement that these two "icons" posted in their late thirties and early forties. Although he was not a good general manager, maybe now history will be a bit kinder to Dan Duquette for letting Clemens walk out of Beantown. Duquette suspected that Clemens was washed up. It turns out that his best days weren't behind him -- but his best honest days were behind him.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Decade's most influential people in sports
By Rick Morris
As mentioned there, my companion post about the most influential people in the world during the decade to date was actually inspired by a question I posed to myself about the most influential in sports this decade. I knew who I would slot #1, and it's a name most would never associate with this list in any capacity, but I frankly don't think people can question my logic.
As with the other list, what is most important is impact for today and the future on the sports world. Honorable mention goes to Bill Belichick (most successful coach/personnel figure of the decade), Peyton Manning (king of endorsements), Barry Bonds (most divisive and thought-provoking person of the decade). With the exception of Bonds (who is one of the figures causing such a public backlash to steroids and HGH that baseball might be forced to clean itself), however, none of them have caused significant, long-term changes to the sports landscape.
Working our way up the list ...
5. Dana White. The UFC president has been on an incredible roll of late, acquiring the assets of his main rival Pride in a deal he compared, only half-ridiculously, to the AFL-NFL merger. Also, in 2006, his organization hired away Marc Ratner, the well-respected executive director of the Nevada State Athletic Commission. This was seen, correctly, as a body blow to what has remained of the credibility of boxing. Almost all of the ills of boxing -- from the lack of a consistent TV presence to the diminishing ability to deliver "dream fights" to the proliferation of too many meaningless titles -- have been eliminated by the kingpin of MMA. He has also cleaned up the sport, instituting needed safety rules and bringing thus bringing needed respectability. In terms of entertainment impact, the UFC has supplanted Vince McMahon's tired empire as the top buyrate engine for pay-per-views. While White has much to do to advance MMA to the top tier of American sports, just the fact that he could plausibly do so in the next few years is breathtaking. Plus, with MMA having great success at the expense of boxing, it has played an important historical role in the sports world, because boxing has traditionally been such a huge part of the landscape in America.
4. Dale Earnhardt, Sr. Death transforms superstars into icons: from Elvis to Knute Rockne to James Dean, the immortality of a constant presence in the culture awaits the gifted who perish before their time. Such is the case for "Big E," whose combination of accomplishment and popularity was unrivaled in his sport. With NASCAR benefiting from the asinine circuit split in the American open-wheel universe, a large and unprecedented national TV contract and huge media attention loomed for the 2001 season even before the tragic, season-starting accident at Daytona. But the tragedy in the final turn took everything to a whole new level and was the final impetus in carrying NASCAR to the top tier of American pro sports.
3. Lebron James. LBJ represented the apex of the high school-to-NBA era, which the Association ended in 2006. But that development didn't change his level of influence at all. He was the first hoops star to be documented so heavily at such a young age; to a certain extent Greg Oden and O.J. Mayo followed in his footsteps by having large media attention so long before college. Others will assuredly follow. But recent comments from Mayo and new crosstown rival Kevin Love about emulating James' media strategies have confirmed what has long been suspected: while Lebron grew up wanting to "Be Like Mike," and admittedly hasn't yet got the titles to match "That #23," stars of these generation are embracing as a model "This #23."
2. Tiger Woods. Doubtless most will find it shocking that this global icon is not tops on the list. He certainly is the most dominant athlete of the decade along with his friend Roger Federer in tennis and has public credibility and advertising dollars out the ying-yang. And although his emergence as one of the top two golfers of all time has helped the PGA to reach a new strata financially, he hasn't had the impact across multiple sports that our top person in sports did, albeit unintentionally.
1. Matt Kenseth. This NASCAR driver won the 2003 Winston Cup championship and is a perennial title threat. But he has a relatively low public profile compared to some other drivers on his talent level. How did he earn our top spot? He did so without trying, actually. His dull 2003 slog to the title in a season in which he won only one race but accrued points in a relentless but uninspiring style was the final straw that pushed NASCAR to institute its current Chase for the Championship playoff format. From 2004 on, the final 10 races of the season have served as a playoff for the drivers who qualify in the first 26 events. This has revitalized late-season fan interest, ratings and media attention as desired and led to the adoption of a playoff format by the PGA and NHRA, both in 2007. It is entirely possible that other circuits may adopt some form of a playoff system at some point, perhaps the ATP, WTA or PBA. Speaking of other circuits, the increased success of NASCAR made possible by the Chase has led to significant defections from both major open-wheel circuits in this country and probably sealed the doom of that form of competition as a major force in motorsports. At any rate, the effects of Kenseth's much-derided coast to the championship in 2003 forever changed NASCAR, solidified it as one of the predominant forces on the American sporting landscape, provided one more body-blow to open-wheel racing, and caused other sports to mimic the revolutionary changes in his own. As such, Matt Kenseth is deservedly the most influential figure in American sports thus far this decade.
As mentioned there, my companion post about the most influential people in the world during the decade to date was actually inspired by a question I posed to myself about the most influential in sports this decade. I knew who I would slot #1, and it's a name most would never associate with this list in any capacity, but I frankly don't think people can question my logic.
As with the other list, what is most important is impact for today and the future on the sports world. Honorable mention goes to Bill Belichick (most successful coach/personnel figure of the decade), Peyton Manning (king of endorsements), Barry Bonds (most divisive and thought-provoking person of the decade). With the exception of Bonds (who is one of the figures causing such a public backlash to steroids and HGH that baseball might be forced to clean itself), however, none of them have caused significant, long-term changes to the sports landscape.
Working our way up the list ...
5. Dana White. The UFC president has been on an incredible roll of late, acquiring the assets of his main rival Pride in a deal he compared, only half-ridiculously, to the AFL-NFL merger. Also, in 2006, his organization hired away Marc Ratner, the well-respected executive director of the Nevada State Athletic Commission. This was seen, correctly, as a body blow to what has remained of the credibility of boxing. Almost all of the ills of boxing -- from the lack of a consistent TV presence to the diminishing ability to deliver "dream fights" to the proliferation of too many meaningless titles -- have been eliminated by the kingpin of MMA. He has also cleaned up the sport, instituting needed safety rules and bringing thus bringing needed respectability. In terms of entertainment impact, the UFC has supplanted Vince McMahon's tired empire as the top buyrate engine for pay-per-views. While White has much to do to advance MMA to the top tier of American sports, just the fact that he could plausibly do so in the next few years is breathtaking. Plus, with MMA having great success at the expense of boxing, it has played an important historical role in the sports world, because boxing has traditionally been such a huge part of the landscape in America.
4. Dale Earnhardt, Sr. Death transforms superstars into icons: from Elvis to Knute Rockne to James Dean, the immortality of a constant presence in the culture awaits the gifted who perish before their time. Such is the case for "Big E," whose combination of accomplishment and popularity was unrivaled in his sport. With NASCAR benefiting from the asinine circuit split in the American open-wheel universe, a large and unprecedented national TV contract and huge media attention loomed for the 2001 season even before the tragic, season-starting accident at Daytona. But the tragedy in the final turn took everything to a whole new level and was the final impetus in carrying NASCAR to the top tier of American pro sports.
3. Lebron James. LBJ represented the apex of the high school-to-NBA era, which the Association ended in 2006. But that development didn't change his level of influence at all. He was the first hoops star to be documented so heavily at such a young age; to a certain extent Greg Oden and O.J. Mayo followed in his footsteps by having large media attention so long before college. Others will assuredly follow. But recent comments from Mayo and new crosstown rival Kevin Love about emulating James' media strategies have confirmed what has long been suspected: while Lebron grew up wanting to "Be Like Mike," and admittedly hasn't yet got the titles to match "That #23," stars of these generation are embracing as a model "This #23."
2. Tiger Woods. Doubtless most will find it shocking that this global icon is not tops on the list. He certainly is the most dominant athlete of the decade along with his friend Roger Federer in tennis and has public credibility and advertising dollars out the ying-yang. And although his emergence as one of the top two golfers of all time has helped the PGA to reach a new strata financially, he hasn't had the impact across multiple sports that our top person in sports did, albeit unintentionally.
1. Matt Kenseth. This NASCAR driver won the 2003 Winston Cup championship and is a perennial title threat. But he has a relatively low public profile compared to some other drivers on his talent level. How did he earn our top spot? He did so without trying, actually. His dull 2003 slog to the title in a season in which he won only one race but accrued points in a relentless but uninspiring style was the final straw that pushed NASCAR to institute its current Chase for the Championship playoff format. From 2004 on, the final 10 races of the season have served as a playoff for the drivers who qualify in the first 26 events. This has revitalized late-season fan interest, ratings and media attention as desired and led to the adoption of a playoff format by the PGA and NHRA, both in 2007. It is entirely possible that other circuits may adopt some form of a playoff system at some point, perhaps the ATP, WTA or PBA. Speaking of other circuits, the increased success of NASCAR made possible by the Chase has led to significant defections from both major open-wheel circuits in this country and probably sealed the doom of that form of competition as a major force in motorsports. At any rate, the effects of Kenseth's much-derided coast to the championship in 2003 forever changed NASCAR, solidified it as one of the predominant forces on the American sporting landscape, provided one more body-blow to open-wheel racing, and caused other sports to mimic the revolutionary changes in his own. As such, Matt Kenseth is deservedly the most influential figure in American sports thus far this decade.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)