Wednesday, August 08, 2007


Should there be or not, that is the question. I have been debating if I actually want to weigh in on this topic so I guess I decided to.

First of all, I actually want to give Bonds some props for hitting 756. Do not take that as "I love it" because I don't but the feat to which he accomplished is amazing. With that said, I hate it. This feat should, in all honestly, be celebrated but cannot due to the large cloud overhead. Bonds will always be a target for an era in baseball where he was not the only one. We all have to admit that others did exactly what Bonds is accused of doing. None of them are as high a profile as Bonds, plus his shitty attitude does not make this situation any better.

Athletes make money based upon what their bodies can do. Bonds has on many occasions said that he was just doing what his trainer told him...bullshit. Why would you just blindly agree to do something that if it goes serious wrong the livelihood that you have setup for your wife and mistress could be harmed? Not just your livelihood, but your life span as well.

I know that in this society you should be "innocent until proven guilty." Bonds is doing nothing to help show how innocent he really is. Does anyone know if his mistress was in attendance?

I am linking to another blog about this issue. No matter who you are, the fact that Bond's stats have gone up since he turned 35 does need some attention.


Anonymous said...

Dude will ALWAYS have an asterisk by the 756 (or whatever it winds up being). Give Ruth or Aaron some of what Bonds had and his name is not even breathed in the same sentence as them.

Some argue he was a good hitter to begin with. Fine. Let him go down with Pete Rose for being a good hitter. But when you juice to get extra distance on the ball? DQ him from the hall. Rose was DQ'd for betting on (not against) his team. To attach your name to what is debatably the most prolific record in all sports by cheating is far worse than that in my book. -paqo

Ryan said...

Good thoughts - this debate will go on and on and on, and will rank up there as one of the top sports arguments of all time (right up there with "was Marino or Elway better at 4th quarter comebacks" [BTLW] or "who's better: Tiger or Jack").

I'm disappointed, though, that you missed a great chance to throw in a great punchline (albeit in the second paragraph of your post): you wrote "large cloud overhead", when you could have phrased it as "cloud over large-head."

Josh said...

Elway, hands down!

Excellent points by both paqo and "Ryan". Ryan, excellent references as well.