Bonds, steroids, ect...

Quote:

Nomah,

i believe it -- remember this SI cover (march, 2001)?

http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/1540/nomahcoverul8.jpg

0 Replies

He's not even that big there. But he only weighed about 75lbs as a rookie, could have thrown a wig and lipstick on him, and pimped him out in Chinatown as a petite Japanese girl.

0 Replies

Slappy Doo Hoo wrote:

He's not even that big there.

Hell I used to look better than that and the only steroids I took were in the foods I ate.

0 Replies

cjhsa wrote:

Hell I used to look better than that....

Didja?

0 Replies

Actually yeah. Nomar always looked small to me. Even when he got "big".

0 Replies

And the before picture:

http://www.daxxus.org/merfy/images/cards/1992ToppsGarciaparra.jpg

0 Replies

cjhsa wrote:

Actually yeah. Nomar always looked small to me. Even when he got "big".

He was never really that big. He's between 5'10-6'0, and weighed 190-195.

0 Replies

Slappy Doo Hoo wrote:

cjhsa wrote:
Actually yeah. Nomar always looked small to me. Even when he got "big".

He was never really that big. He's between 5'10-6'0, and weighed 190-195.

I (was) the same. I ran into Ronnie Lott once and couldn't convince myself that he was who he was because he was the same size as me. I can't bump into a wall without hurting myself - he took people's heads off.

0 Replies

I'm as big and cut-up as a pro ath-uh-leet!

No, fer reel!!!

Laughing

0 Replies

Not any more, age and injury have left me out of shape. But I used to be. It was never hard for me - genetics, ya know?

Besides, like slappy said, he doesn't look all that big there on the SI cover. In fact this is the first time I've seen that cover. Nomar looks like a high school kid as far as his physique goes there. I'm surprised he let it get published as is.

0 Replies

no surprise clemens is denying everything, even though his little buddy 'fessed up...

0 Replies

http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/936/nyyrn6.jpg

0 Replies

I'm sure Mitchell being director of the Red Sox had absolutely no impact at all on the fact that all those big-name Yankees got named and virtually no Red Sox did.

How totally unbiased and fair.

Yeah...right.

0 Replies

Well Kicky, there was a report that was released hours before the final report, that listed Jason Varitek, Trot Nixon, and Mo Vaughn, among other guys, then was pulled due to "errors." I've always supsected Varitek.

I do like how Schilling speaks his mind, but he needs to shut his f*cking mouth on this. How can he say they should take away Roger's Cy Youngs? Now if any of the Sox players who were on the '04 or '07 team are found to be juiceheads, should they take away the rings? I would bet there are users on the team, it's too widespread.

0 Replies

Schill is priceless...

Lights are on, but nobody's home.

0 Replies

kicky wrote:

I'm sure Mitchell being director of the Red Sox had absolutely no impact at all on the fact that all those big-name Yankees got named and virtually no Red Sox did.

not true...

[URL=http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/articles/2007/12/14/a_long_star_studded_drug_roster/]Bahstin Globe[/URL] wrote:

The former Red Sox players cited in the report - in addition to Clemens, Vaughn, Gagné and Canseco - included Brendan Donnelly, Jeremy Giambi, Mike Lansing, Kent Mercker, Mike Stanton, Paxton Crawford, and Manny Alexander. The ones who previously had been linked to steroids in published reports are Vaughn, Canseco, Giambi, Crawford, and Alexander.

Mitchell, who is on leave as a director of the Red Sox, also responded to criticism that he may have favored the team or league owners in his report.

"Judge me by my work," he said. "You will not find any evidence of bias or special treatment of the Red Sox or anyone else."

Slap DH wrote:

I've always supsected Varitek.

don't think so -- it doesn't fit the personality... or the stats.
he's been slowing down the last few years.
if he hits 50 dingers next year, then yeah...

Rh wrote:

Schill is priceless...

Lights are on, but nobody's home.

agreed.
he's a nut job... but he's OUR nut job...

0 Replies

Region Philbis wrote:

Slap DH wrote:
I've always supsected Varitek.

don't think so -- it doesn't fit the personality... or the stats.
he's been slowing down the last few years.
if he hits 50 dingers next year, then yeah.....

Personality? That has ZERO to do with whether or not someone's going to take steroids. When there's millions of dollars on the line, plenty of nice hard working guys will stick a needle in their ass.

Maybe he didn't, I don't know. I'm just going by the fact that he looked like he dropped a good deal of muscle between '03-'04, right at the same time all the accusations starting going around. Then again, could have been purposely done to increase flexibility. Also, he was on the mysterious list that disappeared within hours....

It's not really who has done them at this point, it's who hasn't?

0 Replies

Slappy Doo Hoo wrote:

Region Philbis wrote:
Slap DH wrote:
I've always supsected Varitek.

don't think so -- it doesn't fit the personality... or the stats.
he's been slowing down the last few years.
if he hits 50 dingers next year, then yeah.....

Personality? That has ZERO to do with whether or not someone's going to take steroids. When there's millions of dollars on the line, plenty of nice hard working guys will stick a needle in their ass.

Maybe he didn't, I don't know. I'm just going by the fact that he looked like he dropped a good deal of muscle between '03-'04, right at the same time all the accusations starting going around. Then again, could have been purposely done to increase flexibility. Also, he was on the mysterious list that disappeared within hours....

It's not really who has done them at this point, it's who hasn't?

Oh, I don't know if it's anywhere near established yet that it's so widespread that the clean ones are the exception.

0 Replies

FWIW.

I think Varitek is clean. Many more are not, and I gotta say that the I only did it once and then I felt bad defense has been all used up.

Baseball knows that this is deep. The pit will grow....

RH

0 Replies

Slappy Doo Hoo wrote:

It's not really who has done them at this point, it's who hasn't?

Yeh. I'd give a link to Carroll in the SF Chron except, so what.

The annoying thing to people like me, who've watched over ages, would be to see this all recent stuff as ameliorated. At the same time, I presume even when the teams gathered back when I was nine, someone was cheating in some way.

It is the human condition. Question is what to do about it, high and low on totem poles, or stop with the posturing.

If steroidal additives and red blood cell compounds, not to mention human growth hormone, are available throughout the Athletic Land, what is the average athletic teen to do?

0 Replies

Bonds, steroids, ect...

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know