Why Do We Care About Steroids in Baseball?

[Tenta]

Honestly, what do we really care about the juice?

Is it that the numbers are sacred?

Numbers, like anything else, are just that. Sure, in Baseball, they have a different connotation, but otherwise, shouldn't the mark of a player be in how he carries his team, and how many World Series the man wins?

Besides, every "era" has some odd quirk about it. Babe never had to face back pitchers, or athletes. You want to put an asterisk on every single number until April 15th, 1947? Because that's quite a difference, if you ask me. Plus, you're also negating the effects of eye-hand coordination, and alertness. You show me a drug for these that are steroids, and I'll give you a cookie.

Is it that they taint championships? Hardly.

It takes more than one player to win a championship. Baseball relies on your team more than any other sport. You'd be surprised just how little one team member means to a team. More often than not, the better team beats out the better player. Just ask Barry Bonds.

Is it because they broke a rule?

Well, up until 2003, sorry, but they really didn't. PEDs were not a part of Baseball's tests, and there were no suspensions leveled. So there goes that little argument.

Is it because other sports care? Hardly.

The NFL suspended Calvin Pace for four games for PEDs this summer. I'm pretty sure this may be the first time you heard of that, and if you had heard of it, it was probably on page eight of your newspaper. I know it wasn't covered too much in New York.

So, again, tell me exactly what is so important about players using steroids?

 

[CH David]

Well Tenta, for me personally, I hate steroids because of the strength it adds to the players. Most of the posters on this forum don't really care about steroids. X says that it doesn't make make you know how to hit. While I agree, I also say that they already know how to hit, the balls just goes farther. I care, but players that used them in the past I can't really keep them out of the Hall of Fame like I used to think they should have been.

See I hate when people bring up the fact that the Dead Ball Era didn't allow black men to play. Why? Because of the fact that during that time, there were no equal rights, and not even in the military until 1948, which still took time to take place throughout each branch. It is a portion of time in which America was segregated due to separate but equal. Is it right that it happened? Not at all, and I am not saying that it is right. But for fucks sake people stop using it as an argument. It is a point in time where even sports were separate but equal. In the NFL, from 1934-1946, there were no black players. Should we put an asterisk next to those numbers? (The AFL had more black and minority players than the NFL before the merger) I realize it isn't the same time frame, but you get my point?

I realize that this is the "Steroids" Era, or were trying to wind down and end the era, so the people that used before they were banned should be allowed in if their numbers are good enough.

But Tenta, I want a question answered, I have been asking this for about 2 weeks. The game of baseball is moving away from more power and station to station baseball, (base to base) and moving to more athletic players. Players that can run, hit and field. Steal bases, go from 1st to 3rd with smart running, stretching singles into doubles etc... Why do you need to use steroids? If you are a great player, why do you need a chemical substance to increase your strength? Tony Gwynn was arguably the best hitter for average of the past 20-30 years. He didn't need a substance, look at him, he was an overweight guy, but he was a very good player. So to anyone, Tenta you are included in the asking of this question. Why were steroids necessary?