Jump to content


Bonds!


KJC
 Share

Recommended Posts


same guy caught 661 that caught 660.

 

crazy...

He's going to be a very rich man soon ... Well, he gave the last one back, he'll probably do the same this time.

 

And no, we don't mean 661*

 

Prove it. And don't give me 2 pictures next to each other or "It's SO obvious!" Prove it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

same guy caught 661 that caught 660.

 

crazy...

He's going to be a very rich man soon ... Well, he gave the last one back, he'll probably do the same this time.

 

And no, we don't mean 661*

 

Prove it. And don't give me 2 pictures next to each other or "It's SO obvious!" Prove it. Gotta disagree Hugg.

 

I'm going with 661*.

 

The circumstantial evidence (which i'm not going to list because there is so much and it's late and you know it already) is enough for me to think he's guilty.

 

If you disagree with me, that's fine, but that's my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, you can say it all you want, but you can't put an asterik on it until it's proven. He's owed the right to be innocent until proven guilty.

 

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but he's still owed the right to not have his records tarnished until he's proven guilty.

 

And if he is, then by all means put the * on it, take him off the records completely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i booo you*

All I know is no one did this to Mark McGwire. Maybe because he was all warm and cuddly? Just because you don't like the guy doesn't mean you can tarnish his accomplishments.

 

And how do we know Bonds didn't buff up through the same means McGwire did, which were 100% legal at the time they were used. I can't hate on a guy for using something that was legal to get ahead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, you can say it all you want, but you can't put an asterik on it until it's proven. He's owed the right to be innocent until proven guilty.

 

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but he's still owed the right to not have his records tarnished until he's proven guilty.

 

And if he is, then by all means put the * on it, take him off the records completely.

I'm not actually saying to put an asterik in the books. That can't be done until it's totally proven.

 

All I know is, there is a boatload of circumstantial evidence on this guy. Heck, I hear the CIA is trying to get his urine samples or something to get perjury charges filed on him for what he said to the grand jury a few months back.

 

Is he a great player? Of course. Will I look at him like I do Aaron, Mays, and Ruth? No, I can't. This guy is very suspecious, and has done nothing to even make me THINK he's innocent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not actually saying to put an asterik in the books. That can't be done until it's totally proven.

 

All I know is, there is a boatload of circumstantial evidence on this guy. Heck, I hear the CIA is trying to get his urine samples or something to get perjury charges filed on him for what he said to the grand jury a few months back.

 

Is he a great player? Of course. Will I look at him like I do Aaron, Mays, and Ruth? No, I can't. This guy is very suspecious, and has done nothing to even make me THINK he's innocent.

I see what you're saying and there's no question it's suspicious and I certainly don't believe Bonds did this completely on his own. I have no doubt he used SOMETHING, but again, if that something was legal, I can't rip him for it. I might not like it, but I can't say I definitely wouldn't use it if I was in his position.

 

But, I just can't say the guy is guilty because there's a chance he is, it's suspicious sure, but I know how I'd feel if I was looked at as having done something I didn't do because it was "suspicious."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i booo you*

All I know is no one did this to Mark McGwire. Maybe because he was all warm and cuddly? Just because you don't like the guy doesn't mean you can tarnish his accomplishments.

 

And how do we know Bonds didn't buff up through the same means McGwire did, which were 100% legal at the time they were used. I can't hate on a guy for using something that was legal to get ahead. All that is is the media.

 

The media took it easy on McGwire because he got along with them.

 

Do I think McGwire was on steroids? Absoloutely. I mean, just look at the fact that he's lost about 60 POUNDS since he retired.

 

He's not quiet because he likes being out of the spotlight, he's quite because he knows what people would say if they saw him now....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not actually saying to put an asterik in the books. That can't be done until it's totally proven.

 

All I know is, there is a boatload of circumstantial evidence on this guy. Heck, I hear the CIA is trying to get his urine samples or something to get perjury charges filed on him for what he said to the grand jury a few months back.

 

Is he a great player? Of course. Will I look at him like I do Aaron, Mays, and Ruth? No, I can't. This guy is very suspecious, and has done nothing to even make me THINK he's innocent.

I see what you're saying and there's no question it's suspicious and I certainly don't believe Bonds did this completely on his own. I have no doubt he used SOMETHING, but again, if that something was legal, I can't rip him for it. I might not like it, but I can't say I definitely wouldn't use it if I was in his position.

 

But, I just can't say the guy is guilty because there's a chance he is, it's suspicious sure, but I know how I'd feel if I was looked at as having done something I didn't do because it was "suspicious." All I want is for him to pee in a cup once a week for a season, and to see him put up his typically amazing numbers.

 

I'll shut up and give him his full deserved props if he does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're clearly never going to agree on this and that's fine, but I think it kind of sucks that anytime we talk about him as a player people have to jump in with the steroids stuff, like we don't already know about it.

Understandable, we both have our good points to back up what we say.

 

But, I mean honestly, I think we can agree on this....is it that hard to ask for him to test for a year and prove he's innocent?

 

It clears up his name for good, and don't give me that "privacy" bs that the players union says because you and I know better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Understandable, we both have our good points to back up what we say.

 

But, I mean honestly, I think we can agree on this....is it that hard to ask for him to test for a year and prove he's innocent?

 

It clears up his name for good, and don't give me that "privacy" bs that the players union says because you and I know better.

No it's not, but I still see his point.

 

If he does it and someone else doesn't, then they can go to the other guy and say "WELL BARRY DOES IT!" and I'm sure he doesn't want to throw people under the bus like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're clearly never going to agree on this and that's fine, but I think it kind of sucks that anytime we talk about him as a player people have to jump in with the steroids stuff, like we don't already know about it.

Understandable, we both have our good points to back up what we say.

 

But, I mean honestly, I think we can agree on this....is it that hard to ask for him to test for a year and prove he's ?

 

It clears up his name for good, and don't give me that "privacy" bs that the players union says because you and I know better. He's not in the Union so he could probably get tested independently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're clearly never going to agree on this and that's fine, but I think it kind of sucks that anytime we talk about him as a player people have to jump in with the steroids stuff, like we don't already know about it.

it sucks, but continuous fan suspicion is something bonds has brought upon himself.

 

a guy who has the largest slugging stats jump in his late 30s in MLB history has to bring some suspicion to himself. at the very least it's a huge aberration to see a 37 year old to hit almost twice as well as he did at any point in his entire career.

 

nobody's tellin the guy not to clear his name and pee in a cup. hell, donald fehr went ahead and said it's perfectly okay for him to do it if he wants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...