Michael Brown
Footballguy
You're joking about the bolded part, right?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Big Papi did the roids back in 2003 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter NY/NJMFDIVER
- Start date
Encyclopedia Brown
Footballguy
"Baseball Tonight" ran a bizarre clip of a sweating, stammering Nomah claiming that some guys told the league to put their name on the list even if they weren't positive so the 5% threshold would kick in, and make it mandatory to test everyone.
The host came back after the clip and said that a MLB official told him that only players who tested positive with a urine sample were listed.
What was Nomah rambling about?
The host came back after the clip and said that a MLB official told him that only players who tested positive with a urine sample were listed.
What was Nomah rambling about?
Giantseasonticketholder
Whammy
I think it was his poor attempt at a confession.
Nigel
Footballguy
He's a weird, awkward dude.
Tough As Nails
Glave Master
This is exactly what steroid users of the past should say. Good for Arroyo.
Bronson Arroyo, a former Boston Red Sox teammate of Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz, said he would not be surprised to find his name on a list of 104 ballplayers who tested positive for performance-enhancing drugs in 2003, as he had heard a then-legal supplement he was using was tainted with steroids, the Boston Herald reported.
Arroyo, according to the report, said he does not know if Ortiz and Ramirez, who were identified in a New York Times story as also being among the 104 players testing positive in 2003, were taking anything -- or if so, what it was. He said his knowledge of what his teammates did ended at the clubhouse door. But he does not believe that their accomplishments should be diminished as a result.
"In my mind, I think you have to lump the whole era together," Arroyo said, according to the report. "A lot of people were doing it, a lot weren't. I think pitchers probably gained three or four mph on their pitches and power hitters got some more power.
"But guys like David and Manny, if they did something, it didn't make them who they were. Did it make them a little better? Probably," Arroyo said, according to the report.
Ortiz said he had confirmed through the players union that he tested positive in 2003. He said that came as a surprise to him and that he will say more about the subject when he knows more.
Ramirez, who served a 50-game suspension for violating the league's drug policy, declined to address the Times report, referring inquiries to the players union. Ramirez's specific violation for that ban was never announced, but sources have told ESPN that testing during spring training this year revealed elevated levels of testosterone that had come from an artificial source.
Arroyo, who pitched for the Red Sox from 2003-05 and is now a starter with the Cincinnati Reds, said he took androstenedione, which was banned in 2004, as well as amphetamines, which were banned in 2006, according to the Herald report. He said he gave up taking andro, a steroid precursor, when a rumor spread through baseball that due to lax production standards, some of it was laced with steroids.
Mandatory testing for performance-enhancing drugs in Major League Baseball began in 2004.
"Before 2004, none of us paid any attention to anything we took," he said, according to the Herald. "Now they don't want us to take anything unless it's approved. But back then, who knows what was in stuff? The FDA wasn't regulating stuff, not unless it was killing people or people were dying from it."
Arroyo said he started taking taking andro after 1998, after a season with the Pirates' Double-A affiliate. "Andro made me feel great, I felt like a monster. I felt like I could jump and hit my head on the basketball rim," he said, according to the report.
Arroyo said he is happy the game now has mandatory drug testing, according to the Herald.
"I feel like the game's getting cleared up," he said, according to the report. "Personally, I don't care what people think about what I did. I do what I do."
Bronson Arroyo, a former Boston Red Sox teammate of Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz, said he would not be surprised to find his name on a list of 104 ballplayers who tested positive for performance-enhancing drugs in 2003, as he had heard a then-legal supplement he was using was tainted with steroids, the Boston Herald reported.
Arroyo, according to the report, said he does not know if Ortiz and Ramirez, who were identified in a New York Times story as also being among the 104 players testing positive in 2003, were taking anything -- or if so, what it was. He said his knowledge of what his teammates did ended at the clubhouse door. But he does not believe that their accomplishments should be diminished as a result.
"In my mind, I think you have to lump the whole era together," Arroyo said, according to the report. "A lot of people were doing it, a lot weren't. I think pitchers probably gained three or four mph on their pitches and power hitters got some more power.
"But guys like David and Manny, if they did something, it didn't make them who they were. Did it make them a little better? Probably," Arroyo said, according to the report.
Ortiz said he had confirmed through the players union that he tested positive in 2003. He said that came as a surprise to him and that he will say more about the subject when he knows more.
Ramirez, who served a 50-game suspension for violating the league's drug policy, declined to address the Times report, referring inquiries to the players union. Ramirez's specific violation for that ban was never announced, but sources have told ESPN that testing during spring training this year revealed elevated levels of testosterone that had come from an artificial source.
Arroyo, who pitched for the Red Sox from 2003-05 and is now a starter with the Cincinnati Reds, said he took androstenedione, which was banned in 2004, as well as amphetamines, which were banned in 2006, according to the Herald report. He said he gave up taking andro, a steroid precursor, when a rumor spread through baseball that due to lax production standards, some of it was laced with steroids.
Mandatory testing for performance-enhancing drugs in Major League Baseball began in 2004.
"Before 2004, none of us paid any attention to anything we took," he said, according to the Herald. "Now they don't want us to take anything unless it's approved. But back then, who knows what was in stuff? The FDA wasn't regulating stuff, not unless it was killing people or people were dying from it."
Arroyo said he started taking taking andro after 1998, after a season with the Pirates' Double-A affiliate. "Andro made me feel great, I felt like a monster. I felt like I could jump and hit my head on the basketball rim," he said, according to the report.
Arroyo said he is happy the game now has mandatory drug testing, according to the Herald.
"I feel like the game's getting cleared up," he said, according to the report. "Personally, I don't care what people think about what I did. I do what I do."
Reaper
Footballguy
Still glad I can point to my posts when it was "only" Bonds and say I never swayed on this issue...
Lots of Red Sox fans from that thread and the Arod thread MIA here though... Read a lot about how Bonds was a Cheater and didn't deserve to be in the HOF or deserve praise for any records.
I guess it's just not as much fun anymore to get up on a soapbox about roids....
Lots of Red Sox fans from that thread and the Arod thread MIA here though... Read a lot about how Bonds was a Cheater and didn't deserve to be in the HOF or deserve praise for any records.
I guess it's just not as much fun anymore to get up on a soapbox about roids....
dparker713
Footballguy
The two reporters that wrote Game of Shadows each were sentenced to 18 months of prision time, though they avoided incarceration after the leak plead guilty. IMO, they should have gone to jail as well and they could have if the judge had decided to enforce the contempt charges. The editors would need to also refuse to testify, but its not a tenuous argument. The publishers would be a bit more difficult. A fine runs into free of speech issues and they likely have no personal knowledge of the story, but I'd drag them into the court just to ruin their days.Michael Brown said:
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
Sill don't care.
Doctor Detroit
Please remove your headgear
I'M SHOCKED!
Jeremy
Footballguy
I'm going to guess you don't have kids that aren't already out of the house. I have a 7 year old son and we love to play catch or play wiffleball. So far it looks like he's inherited my athletic skills (very little). I'm actually relieved, because it's very clear that if anyone dreams of being a big league player, and wants to act on that dream, they're going to have to put that crap in their body. Look at the numbers on the juice and off for guys like Pappi, Sosa, and Giambi. You have almost no chance if you don't cheat. Or at least no chance to be a star (please don't tell me Pujols is clean). So I'm happy my kid is a klutz. He probably won't make it past little league. He's pretty smart (didn't get that from me). Hopefully a nice safe spot on the chess team will be in his future.
Those guys are all millionairres.
dparker713
Footballguy
Sorry, but I fail to see why other people's rights need to be curtailed because their notoriety makes it more difficult for you to raise your child. Next you'll be telling me Viagra needs to be taken off the shelves because it promotes fornication. If Charles Barkley is your kid's role model, then you're doing something wrong.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Uh, Pujols' numbers have been very consistent across the board throughout his entire MLB career, so if he has been on the juice and then off it at some point in his career, you'd never know it by his numbers. I know it is difficult to believe any MLB player nowadays, but it seems like everyone is eventually caught, so if Pujols (or anyone else) is cheating, he will eventually be found out. As a Cardinals fan, I would be saddened if he, too, was found to have used PEDs, but it wouldn't surprise me. Sadly, like I said, it is hard to believe any MLB player anymore.
Last edited by a moderator:
Adebisi
Footballguy
Red Sox fan here. Personally, I am not the least bit surprised; I had Papi pegged as a 'roid user all along (although admittedly, I did think there was a chance Manny wasn't doing them). My stance is the same as it always has been: Who cares? Let everyone do them.
Reaper
Footballguy
You were on the good list.
TheFanatic
Footballguy
That's the point. All these guys who do come clean (pardon the pun) all say they made a mistake or had a lapse of judgement. BS. They saw the chance to score some major scrilla and took them and many would do it all over again even if they knew they would get caught.
TheFanatic
Footballguy
The only problem with that is that of the people that were tested, I believe only a handful tested positive for something that was later banned by the league. Andro if you will. I can try to find the link to that as it listed a specific number...ETA, I found the link
Arroyo's does sound plausible and believable. Something tells me that a few dozen guys are going to claim that they are one of those 8 that were technically legal in the eyes of MLB at the time...
Last edited by a moderator:
NY/NJMFDIVER
Footballguy
I neva dida steroid, I dida ova da coutna suppliment....
Dominican Over the Counter Suppliment = Steroids in the U.S.
Dominican Over the Counter Suppliment = Steroids in the U.S.
NY/NJMFDIVER
Footballguy
Just for the record, and so we're clear, Ortiz doesn't know what he took, he took SOMETHING over the counter in the DR, but what he does know, its not steroids.
PS, he was training with a guy all mixed up with roids then and now, in Presinal.
Cue the pass from ESPN in 3,2.....
PS, he was training with a guy all mixed up with roids then and now, in Presinal.
Cue the pass from ESPN in 3,2.....
PatsWillWin
Footballguy
think some people here owe Ortiz an apology.
NY/NJMFDIVER
Footballguy
You know, its funny, people probably fairly call A-Rod, almost unanmiously, a "phony".
However, I'm not buying this fat, jolly, domnican santa act from Papi any further. What could have been more phony than this song and dance today?
He's basically asking for the benefit of the doubt, but are Clemens and Bonds being given this?
And I have zero problem with the Boston fans defending him, sometimes you circle the wagon around your own people, my problem is within the media, who in coverage and columns did all they could to crucify A-rod, and I'll concede, his appearances were less than stellar, but they were like a full confession compared to this tired schtick. A-Rod is an a hole and Papi is a "good guy" and he'll slide on this.
However, I'm not buying this fat, jolly, domnican santa act from Papi any further. What could have been more phony than this song and dance today?
He's basically asking for the benefit of the doubt, but are Clemens and Bonds being given this?
And I have zero problem with the Boston fans defending him, sometimes you circle the wagon around your own people, my problem is within the media, who in coverage and columns did all they could to crucify A-rod, and I'll concede, his appearances were less than stellar, but they were like a full confession compared to this tired schtick. A-Rod is an a hole and Papi is a "good guy" and he'll slide on this.
DropKick
Footballguy
In the case of Clemens, Bonds and A-rod (among others), you had collective evidence, anecdotal stories from Canseco and the like. Hey, Clemens even had someone willing to give him AND HIS WIFE up. Ortiz actually has some credible doubt. "Anonymous testing" was a debacle. Fake lists have circulated. The union can't/won't confirm anything. Eight of the "positives" were noted as supplement related. Ortiz has taken his stance and I have no choice but to give him the benefit of the doubt for now. However, the way these things appear to work is that if someone has some dirt it will make its way to the public soon enough. If he has lied about it, he'll be viewed poorly as have the others who opted for denial and have been proven liars.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Jefferson the Caregiver
Rebel Without A Pause
It's a nicely crafted story but I don't believe it.
I don't even really care that he used, the era was so tainted, to not use put you at a setback.
What I care is that he won't admit it, that he chooses to lie even when he's been caught.
I like Ortiz so eventually this will pass but the part that bothers me is not the using it's that he puts himself in the category of the Clemens and Bonds when lies about it.
I don't even really care that he used, the era was so tainted, to not use put you at a setback.
What I care is that he won't admit it, that he chooses to lie even when he's been caught.
I like Ortiz so eventually this will pass but the part that bothers me is not the using it's that he puts himself in the category of the Clemens and Bonds when lies about it.
MrJimmy
Footballguy
Lou Merloni recently explained this so-called anonymous testing procedure. Players were told beforehand that it would be anonymous. Then, when the time came for the tests, they were each given a random number. So far, so good. Then, as they called each player in to give their urine sample, the player had to sign on a line that included their random number AND their name. Many were questioning what that was all about, but they were assured that it would be anonymous. Merloni said it was chaos and all the players felt fleeced afterward.Also- in February, when Ortiz was talking about ARod and steroids, he did say that he might accidentally have taken something at some point in his life. That little qualifier mostly got overlooked. He then went on to rip steroids. So, yeah, I do think Ortiz is being somewhat consistent here. Now, maybe it's a story all fabricated ahead of time to cover himself in case he was ever revealed to have failed a test, I dunno.Although I am a Boston fan, I'm really just tired of all this. I don't care which players did what drug or what team has the most failed tests. The hell with all that. In some respects, I would be glad to know for sure that most players were juicing- at least it evens the field a bit. For now, just keep up with the testing and issue appropriate punishments going forward. And GIVE ME BACK MY BASEBALL, dammit.
Last edited by a moderator:
Twilight
Footballguy
TitusIII
Footballguy
If you're in this boat, and the players union/players/agents/majority of fans/etc most certainly appear to be in it, regardless of the ridiculous PR spin the lawyers/PR "experts" are putting out recently(seriously, this spin is about as ridiculous as I've ever seen in my 40 odd years of following "spinsters"), you should be pushing, and I mean seriously pushing/demanding/etc that MLB allow all/any form of PED use. With that being said, under current US law/MLB rules, any player caught using a steroid is cheating/breaking the law. Luckily for MLB/NBA/NFL/etc players, they have a powerful union that has fought for "slap on the wrist" forms of punishment for pretty much everything they do that is considered wrong in the eyes of the league/law. I guess what I"m getting at is this...I only see two camps that are being logical/rational in this debate(and neither one is getting much play in the national sporting media for obvious reasons that should make most of us ill)...camp one is arguing for unlimited/unregulated PED use by the players, because it's only natural to search for an edge, whether it be in the form of a chemical or hard-work, etc...this kind of crap has been going on for ages due to the money at stake in professional sports and NOTHING(barring my argument in camp #2 coming to fruition) will ever stop the players from doing everything and anything to grab their stake of the riches on the line.Camp two, and this is where I quite obviously stand on the issue, is arguing for testing that actually functions as a deterrent(Olympic-style) and catches offenders more often than not. The MLB program, from everything I've read/heard from the folks who are involved in it, is basically a joke to those with the means to stay one step ahead of the curve. If MLB seriously wants to take a hard-line stance against PED use, and I believe the owners do, they need to fight the union tooth and nail on this issue. Since this issue(Olympic-style drug testing AND similar Olympic-style punishments...one year suspensions...etc) will hit the offending players hard, this issue could conceivably result in a strike if the owners take a hard-stance.There really isn't a middle ground on the issue if both sides want it "solved" once and for all...it's quite simple, but once the lawyers/unions/etc get involved, a simple solution is nowhere to be found.
dparker713
Footballguy
Thats like saying the only logical options for any possible violations of the law are acquittal or the death penalty. I get it, you think steroids are really bad, but there are plenty of logical/rational options in regards to steroids in pro sports.If you're in this boat, and the players union/players/agents/majority of fans/etc most certainly appear to be in it, regardless of the ridiculous PR spin the lawyers/PR "experts" are putting out recently(seriously, this spin is about as ridiculous as I've ever seen in my 40 odd years of following "spinsters"), you should be pushing, and I mean seriously pushing/demanding/etc that MLB allow all/any form of PED use. With that being said, under current US law/MLB rules, any player caught using a steroid is cheating/breaking the law. Luckily for MLB/NBA/NFL/etc players, they have a powerful union that has fought for "slap on the wrist" forms of punishment for pretty much everything they do that is considered wrong in the eyes of the league/law. I guess what I"m getting at is this...I only see two camps that are being logical/rational in this debate(and neither one is getting much play in the national sporting media for obvious reasons that should make most of us ill)...camp one is arguing for unlimited/unregulated PED use by the players, because it's only natural to search for an edge, whether it be in the form of a chemical or hard-work, etc...this kind of crap has been going on for ages due to the money at stake in professional sports and NOTHING(barring my argument in camp #2 coming to fruition) will ever stop the players from doing everything and anything to grab their stake of the riches on the line.Camp two, and this is where I quite obviously stand on the issue, is arguing for testing that actually functions as a deterrent(Olympic-style) and catches offenders more often than not. The MLB program, from everything I've read/heard from the folks who are involved in it, is basically a joke to those with the means to stay one step ahead of the curve. If MLB seriously wants to take a hard-line stance against PED use, and I believe the owners do, they need to fight the union tooth and nail on this issue. Since this issue(Olympic-style drug testing AND similar Olympic-style punishments...one year suspensions...etc) will hit the offending players hard, this issue could conceivably result in a strike if the owners take a hard-stance.There really isn't a middle ground on the issue if both sides want it "solved" once and for all...it's quite simple, but once the lawyers/unions/etc get involved, a simple solution is nowhere to be found.
TitusIII
Footballguy
I don't think they are that "bad" nowadays, in fact, I think that recent testing has shown or is very close to proving that many of the chemicals or "PED's" on the market are beneficial to the human body. With that being said, the MLBPA is clouding this issue and pissing me off in the process. If the owners want PED use to stop, push hard for implementation of olympic-style drug testing/punishment. Only the most idiotic players will attempt to break the rules/law in that case. Of course, these are millionaires, and some will stay ahead of the testing curve/on the cutting edge of nutritional science, but I think the PED "problem" will be significantly reduced. On the other hand, I want the MLBPA to cut the crap and tow the line that most of us are thinking anyway...that PED use is fine under most circumstances and should be allowed. That is what they not-so-secretly feel, so lets get this party started. I just want the wishy-washy testing/excuses/etc to end, one way or the other. Sorry for venting, I'm just tired of the never-ending spin from the MLBPA/sports-reporters/athletes/etc...Thats like saying the only logical options for any possible violations of the law are acquittal or the death penalty. I get it, you think steroids are really bad, but there are plenty of logical/rational options in regards to steroids in pro sports.If you're in this boat, and the players union/players/agents/majority of fans/etc most certainly appear to be in it, regardless of the ridiculous PR spin the lawyers/PR "experts" are putting out recently(seriously, this spin is about as ridiculous as I've ever seen in my 40 odd years of following "spinsters"), you should be pushing, and I mean seriously pushing/demanding/etc that MLB allow all/any form of PED use. With that being said, under current US law/MLB rules, any player caught using a steroid is cheating/breaking the law. Luckily for MLB/NBA/NFL/etc players, they have a powerful union that has fought for "slap on the wrist" forms of punishment for pretty much everything they do that is considered wrong in the eyes of the league/law. I guess what I"m getting at is this...I only see two camps that are being logical/rational in this debate(and neither one is getting much play in the national sporting media for obvious reasons that should make most of us ill)...camp one is arguing for unlimited/unregulated PED use by the players, because it's only natural to search for an edge, whether it be in the form of a chemical or hard-work, etc...this kind of crap has been going on for ages due to the money at stake in professional sports and NOTHING(barring my argument in camp #2 coming to fruition) will ever stop the players from doing everything and anything to grab their stake of the riches on the line.Camp two, and this is where I quite obviously stand on the issue, is arguing for testing that actually functions as a deterrent(Olympic-style) and catches offenders more often than not. The MLB program, from everything I've read/heard from the folks who are involved in it, is basically a joke to those with the means to stay one step ahead of the curve. If MLB seriously wants to take a hard-line stance against PED use, and I believe the owners do, they need to fight the union tooth and nail on this issue. Since this issue(Olympic-style drug testing AND similar Olympic-style punishments...one year suspensions...etc) will hit the offending players hard, this issue could conceivably result in a strike if the owners take a hard-stance.There really isn't a middle ground on the issue if both sides want it "solved" once and for all...it's quite simple, but once the lawyers/unions/etc get involved, a simple solution is nowhere to be found.
Last edited by a moderator:
Big 'N Tasty
Footballguy
You know, judging by how much money he made after he took them in 2003, I don't think he regrets it.
BoulderBob
Footballguy
I agree with you cuz, the spin is crazy and the PED craze can be put to rest once and for all with IOC-style testing or letting the MLBPA call the shots and basically stop testing for anything.
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
I have a 5 year old. Today's athletes are our gladiators. They are pure entertainment. The "purety" of sports has never existed in the manner that the "old guard" try to attribute. The purety comes from a rules system that allows for some level of fairness in the sense that the outcome isn't preordained. That's it. Beyond that every era of athlete has attempted to skirt the rules without being caught in an effort to produce and win more. When Ruth played baseball coccain was readily available and forms of heroin were as well. When Mantle played they were just coming out with the new era of cortisone shots and other forms of pain medications that gave the players an edge. Before the steroid era there were amphetamines and other uppers to keep them going. And baseball ins't the only sport that has a drug history - if you think football has ever been clean you are insane.It's part of the culture and we demand it as fans. Andy Pettite had the best answer to the question - yes I did it. I thought I owed it to the fans and the team that is counting on me and paying me. And aren't we? How many times do we want a plyer to play hurt? Always. How many times do we see an athlete get a shot before a game to play? Crying any form of foul on this stuff is hypocritical and short sighted.Do I want my son to kill his body with this stuff? Of course not. But let's not act naive here.
Similar threads
