The Mitchell Report

• The Mitchell Report by BaldRob on 14 Dec, 2007 08:36
• With the release of the Mitchell Report on performance enhancing drugs in Major League Baseball, I'm just wondering what everyone here thinks about it and the implications that are sure to be brought by the report.
• #1 by schro on 14 Dec, 2007 08:53
• Glad it's out in the open. I love baseball and hope they clean their house.
• #2 by Robmeister on 14 Dec, 2007 09:02
• I bet there's players on there that are both guilty and innocent.
  
  Haven't followed it real close so I don't know what the consequences are down the road.   Hope it doesn't become too much of a witch hunt.
  
  It's definitely a wake up call.  So I voted "taking it with a grain of salt."
• #3 by D.A.L.U.I. on 14 Dec, 2007 09:24
• The view of "juice" has changed over the years.  When I was in college, the concept was new and accepted--the football team was on juice at the school's insistence, the idea was new and in from then East Germany.  For many years juice was easily available, then even after the straight juice was made prescription, the precursor stuff was not only available but openly advertised.  I'm not "upset" when guys who are in a tough and demanding physical sport, pushed by their teams and the public to achieve at higher and higher levels respond by using every possible means to stay in the game.  Whether it's a smart decision before or after the juice became prescription only, or whether the use of stimulants generally in professional and school sports is entirely another matter.  The people managing the sports many of whom originally advocated the use of juice and other stimulants by athletes turned their backs and refused to accept responsiblity for their prior actions, only the athletes were subjected to criticism.  Personally, I haven't and wouldn't use them, but I'm not going to point my finger and guys and gals who used the stuff, largely driven by the public's unreasonable expectations.
• #4 by warhawk on 14 Dec, 2007 09:26
• i just want major league baseball 2 just find a way 2 clean up their sport.  i'm glad this came out because all the focus was on barry bonds.  i'm not a bonds fan but it was unfair that he was singled out.  i mean...come on...he definitely isn't the only one taking the performance enhancing drugs.  this will definitely take a major hit with this season's attendance.  i think there will  b  a lot of baseball fans that will NOT watch the games.  it's funny.... but that book by jose canseco seems 2  b  true when alot of people doubted him initially.
  
  now.... when i  c  a  baseball player breaking records or just having an unbelievable season...i'm wondering if he is using performance enhancing drugs.  i'm just sick and tired of millionaire spoiled athletes in general.
  
  WARHAWK  
• #5 by PBurke on 14 Dec, 2007 09:55
• that is why i stick to college sports. no overpaid prima-donas. as far as performance enhancing drugs. they are doing it. i would too if they were giving me 60 million dollars to perform at a certain level. who the hell wouldn't try to gain an advantage over the competition that is doing it. i don't like the fact that sports has gotten to this, but it is what it is. we as consumers are partly to blame. all the pressure to perform for the "fans" has pushed athletes to weaken their morals for the almighty dollar. if everyone would quit supporting these schmucks and show them that it ain't ok, then they may wake up. but noone will stand up and say ENOUGH DAMMIT. all anyone will do is bitch and whine about steroid use. while the almighty dollar pushes these athletes to do better, give more, etc. all the drugs in the world can't put the bat on the ball, or catch the winning pass. if i was to take steroids and face a major league pitcher, i would look like a clown. i don't have the natural ability to play the game. steroids get a guy that is able to hit homers sometimes, into a class where he can hit the ball farther. look at batting averages on bonds before all the crap started. (no i am not condoning him) but look at before and after. slugging percetages went up but did he put the ball in play as much before? probably more so. i have said it before, i miss the classy athletes the jordans, or the byrds, or the mantles, the gretzkys, etc. but professional sports has evolved to a place that is pitiful. if you ban some substances, more "cleaner" ones will be made. it is a neverending process. fueled buy the consumer and the almighty dollar.
• #6 by nomad on 14 Dec, 2007 19:12
• Quote from: PBurke on 14 Dec, 2007 09:55

  that is why i stick to college sports. no overpaid prima-donas. as far as performance enhancing drugs. they are doing it. i would too if they were giving me 60 million dollars to perform at a certain level. who the hell wouldn't try to gain an advantage over the competition that is doing it. i don't like the fact that sports has gotten to this, but it is what it is. we as consumers are partly to blame. all the pressure to perform for the "fans" has pushed athletes to weaken their morals for the almighty dollar. if everyone would quit supporting these schmucks and show them that it ain't ok, then they may wake up. but noone will stand up and say ENOUGH DAMMIT. all anyone will do is bitch and whine about steroid use. while the almighty dollar pushes these athletes to do better, give more, etc. all the drugs in the world can't put the bat on the ball, or catch the winning pass. if i was to take steroids and face a major league pitcher, i would look like a clown. i don't have the natural ability to play the game. steroids get a guy that is able to hit homers sometimes, into a class where he can hit the ball farther. look at batting averages on bonds before all the crap started. (no i am not condoning him) but look at before and after. slugging percetages went up but did he put the ball in play as much before? probably more so. i have said it before, i miss the classy athletes the jordans, or the byrds, or the mantles, the gretzkys, etc. but professional sports has evolved to a place that is pitiful. if you ban some substances, more "cleaner" ones will be made. it is a neverending process. fueled buy the consumer and the almighty dollar.
  

  
  I couldn't have said it better Paulie.
  
  I love college football and I live with pro football but I don't give 2 $h!t$ about Baseball so It doesn't change my oppinion of baseball at all.
  
• #7 by VFRWolf on 14 Dec, 2007 19:26
• I think they should be banned from the sport and stripped of all their accomplishments.  Just like they did Pete Rose for gambling.  And he bet for himself, not the other team.
• #8 by Tyler on 15 Dec, 2007 01:02
• I think it's good that they are out in the open so that they can rid the league of the abusers.  I know it's been used a ton in the past, but we don't need it in the league to still make it exciting.  Plus, steroids don't win a world series, they just help individuals pad the stats.  Just ask Barry "I'll never have a ring" Bonds
• #9 by Dadillac on 16 Dec, 2007 19:33
• The only problem I have with the report is that it is definitely incomplete. I would wager that there are more "marginal" players on steroids than superstars. These "marginal" players have much more to lose if the get cut from the team. And to think that college level players aren't doping is being naive. Hell steroid use starts at high school level. There is always a way around detection when millions of dollars are on the line.
  
  Don