756*
 

Posted By: <b>Rick McQuillan</b><p>Jay, I agree with your original post. The true villan in all of this (maybe villan is too harsh-incompetent fool is more accurate) is Bud Selig. He looked the other way for the past 15 or so years, he would not stand up to the union and do the right thing in regard to drug testing and penalties. Barry Bonds is simply of product of Bud Selig's and the baseball owners greed.<br /><br />Rick

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Chad</b><p>I was too young to see him as a player, but even from my early baseball fandom, I knew there was something wise and special about the guy. One last hurrah for the Negro Leagues!<br /><br />--Chad<br /><br />

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>Dang. I just just missed it. I've been trying to stay up and watch, but last night decided I couldn't keep limping by on so little sleep. So I only watched until about the 4th. <br /><br />Oh well - I'm thrilled that he broke the record!<br /><br />As to the guy that got the ball - wow. So a few thousand people sit out in the sun drinking beer for 2 or 3 hours, and then someone throws a million dollar baseball into this crowd and says whoever gets it can keep it. At what point is someone in MLB going to realize that maybe this isn't such a hot idea? Someone's going to get seriously hurt. It looks to me like it took way too long for any police or security to get over there and unpile the pile to protect the people on the bottom. The guy in the red #22 jersey - that climbed on the pile when he clearly had no chance whatsoever to get the ball - should be in jail this morning.<br /><br />And Cobby - you were there??? How great for you - what a thrill!<br /><br />Joann

756*
 

Posted By: <b>steve yawitz</b><p>I'm guessing if one were to flip through the pages of Sports Illustrated or ESPN the Magazine, one would find print ads for substances designed to make our kids more attentive, elevate our flagging moods, sustain our erections, etc. To me, there's just too much disconnect between our righteous indignation at athletes' use of steroids and similar substances and our own unbridled enthusiasm for performance-enhancing drugs.<br /><br />I am not at all a fan of Barry Bonds, but I recognize his greatness and begrudge him none of his success.<br><br><a href="http://imageevent.com/yawie99" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://imageevent.com/yawie99</a>

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Like him or hate him, Bonds admitted to using performance enhancing drugs and all circumstantial and much direct evidence proves that he has used steroids. I don't know about the rest of you, but my hat size hasn't increased dramatically from my 20s to 40s. Bonds is a great player, no doubt, but a cheater, period. Sad that he felt the need to cheat in order to become as popular as McGwire and Sosa -- because he now got exactly what he wished for: he's as popular as both. ARod will take the record most likely and Bonds will be the face of cheating in baseball for the "Steroid Era" for all eternity. Unfortunately for him, he was just one of many cheaters, but because of his homerun records he will be the face of cheating no matter how much and how strongly he lies about his steroid use.

756*
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>This is certainly not the happiest moment in baseball history, and it's unfortunate that a record of this magnitude can't be fully enjoyed, but it's in the record book and it counts.<br /><br />I was a big Barry Bonds fan during his monster seasons and was of course disappointed at Barry for cheating, and at myself for not realizing that guys in their late thirties don't hit 73 home runs or have .862 slugging percentages.<br /><br />But he is the new record holder and I accept that fact, and only wish it could have been a more shining accomplishment.

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Tony Andrea</b><p>I personally do not care for Barry Bonds, but do respect his talent.<br />Bonds will get into the Hall of Fame, but by doing so, you must allow <br />the Mcgwire's, & Sosa's in as well. You cant keep those guys out due<br />to allegations when those same allegations fall on Bonds himself.<br /><p>Tony

756*
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>McGwire is as eligible as anyone else but he only got 22% of the vote. You can't force the sportswriters to vote for him.

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Steve f</b><p><i>shhhh</i> Myself, and many other Bostonians have just become discreet Yankees fans. <br /><br />resize pic

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Tony Andrea</b><p>Hi Barry -<br />I agree, but those same sports writers that kept Mcgwire out<br />for the steroid allegations will put Bonds in, when the allegations<br />apply almost identically to him to.<br />I'm just saying you can't say this guys in, but that guy's not<br />when they both are clearly guilty for the same thing.<br /><p><br />Steve - That pose is classic. It hangs in my office at home to.<br />Almost makes you feel like your there, huh?<br />

756*
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Yes Tony, but Bonds's stats sail past McGwire's, so much so that it will be tough to deny him (although Rose's stats were likewise in a class of their own).<br /><br />McGwire hit 583 homeruns, and Bonds is likely to surpass that by 200 (if he does in fact play one more year). And all his other numbers will be in the stratosphere. It makes it tougher to just say no.

756*
 

Posted By: <b>JK</b><p>David - Im no Bonds apologist, in fact, I dont really care for the guy at all. Nevertheless, Ive got to say that your argument that Bonds' cheating is the root of all evil is so unsound its really quite funny.

756*
 

Posted By: <b>MVSNYC</b><p>someone just sent this to me...it's all in fun, so don't crusify me for posting it (i didn't make it)...<br /><br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1186583377.JPG">

756*
 

Posted By: <b>steve</b><p>Couldn't believe it - nearly the first thing out of my wife's mouth this morning was a bashing Barry Bonds spout - Ha Ha !<br /><br />By the way, I am working on a new creme to administer to creased, scuffed & pinholed cards to make them new again. <br /><br />Steve.<br />

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Tony Andrea</b><p>Barry -<br />My argument wasn't comparing Mcgwire's numbers to Bonds. <br />There's no doubt Bonds was a better all around player by far.<br />My argument is Mcgwire's stats are HOF worthy, and he shouldn't<br />be passed upon solely on steroid allegations if those same allegations <br />apply to Bonds as well. <br />If the writers hang that over Mcgwire's head and keep him out, how<br />can they say, well Bonds is guilty to, but he did hit 200+ more<br />HR's, and he is the HR king, so we have to put him in. <br />This entire era is tainted due to enhancing drugs, so the same standards<br />should be applied to all players accused equally. Numbers aside.<br /><br />ps - If I knew how to apply a smiley face at the end of my post, i'd do it.<br />Never have figured out how to do that. <br /><br />

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Chad</b><p>: ) without the space in the middle. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />--Chad

756*
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>And a semi-colon followed by a ) will give a blinking eye as in <img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />We don't really know how the voters will react in Bonds's first year of eligibility. McGwire's stats are HOF worthy, but it is still possible that Bonds will get in and McGwire won't. We'll have to wait and see.

756*
 

Posted By: <b>James Feagin</b><p><img src="http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y203/brooksie05/1964oh.jpg">

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Chad</b><p>I used to hit, 50, 60 homeruns a game in Atari 2600 baseball. The trick was hitting it directly over secondbase and not getting bored with own greatness.<br /><br />--Chad

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Tony Andrea</b><p><img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14><img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br />Holy crap, that was easy. Thanks guys.....

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>Let's be very very clear about this:<br />1) Bonds is a cheater. However naturally skilled he actually is, no one will ever know. <br />2) Blaming Selig is just plain dumb (unless we later find out that he was overtly and deliberately encouraging steroid use). <br />3) There is absolutely no reason to believe that Hank Aaron actually, truly honors this record being broken in this fashion by this man.<br />4) Celebrating and honoring someone who didn't play by the rules is a hollow and worthless activity.<br />5) If HOF balloting in the coming years is conducted with only an eye towards their stats, what a truly embarrassing cast of characters we will have traipsing through Cooperstown:<br />Barry Bonds<br />Mark McGwire<br />Sammy Sosa<br />Rafael Palmeiro<br />Roger Clemens<br />How much you wanna bet none of these guys set up at autograph tables in the coming years?<br /><br />disgusting.

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Joe D.</b><p>well....<br /><br />I wasn't sure how I would feel about it before it happened.<br /><br />I 'believe' it is likely bonds took steroids. So, going into this - I was thinking I did not like or appreciate this record chase.<br /><br /><br />But... <br /><br />After seeing it.<br /><br />I can't help but be excited about it and I did feel the magic of the moment.<br /><br />I am surprised about that myself.... but it was special.<br /><br /><br />(btw... I never much liked the SF Giants.... but as you know I very much like the NY Giants. It was nice to see that Giants uniform take the record.)

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Jason, I agree with what you said with one exception: I don't think you can lump Clemens in with that lot at this stage. The actions of the others as well as the evidence compiled against them is much more significant than against Clemens as of today.

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Anyone remember how much more exciting Aaron's 715th was? Totally feel-good moment as a kid...a memory I'll never forget. I had zero interest in watching Bonds's moment along with his lie at the press conference after in which he claimed that the record is not tainted at all. Perhaps Greg Anderson's refusal to testify before the Grand Jury about Bonds' steroid use suggests otherwise. Funny that Anderson has spent more time in jail avoiding the questioning than he probably would have received had he lied before the GJ and claimed that he never provided Bonds with steroids.

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>you're right, there is far less incriminating evidence of him using any drugs. And I truly hope that he did not, because I kinda think he's cool. <br /><br />But that bat-throwing incident - if that wasn't roid rage, then<br />1) I would be surprised, and <br />2) Let's get him into some serious anger mgmt classes, huh?! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br />

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>Personally, I watched Glavine get number 300 but didn't tune in to watch Bonds get 756. Because of Johnson's bad back, there may never be another 300 game winner in MLB. I could care less about Bonds. Aaaron and Maris are the record holders to me...

756*
 

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Highly unlikely McGwire, Sosa, Palmiero will ever make HOF. Bonds would as it stands today but likely more damning info will come out that will in the end prohibit him from making HOF. Likely imo that Clemens cheated as well--and I think its probable that in the next 5 years more info will come out about him that will keep him out. I certainly hope so.

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>I agree with Bob re Glavine and the 300 win plateau and Jim's assertions about Clemens. I suspect he cheated...but there is not credible evidence out there. Yet. Hopefully he didn't cheat because to watch a guy win 350+ games it out of this world. Talk about a mark that will not be approached again in our lifetimes...right?

756*
 

Posted By: <b>RC</b><p>We at Net 54 are extremely proud of your newly acquired technical abilities!!!<br /><br />RC

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Tony Andrea</b><p>Thanks RC. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

756*
 

Posted By: <b>paulstratton</b><p>Maddux is only 10 wins shy of 350 as we speak and using the "eyeball test", it doesn't look like he juiced. He might just pitch for a few more years and pass Spahn, which would be absolutely remarkable. If we devalue the offensive numbers, then we should elevate pitching numbers like these, he dominated during the roid era.

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>I'm a big fan and admirer of Maddux, so don't get me wrong here, but when I hear the name Maddux, dominating isn't the word that comes to mind.<br /><br />I would say he "navigated" the roid era very adeptly. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br /><br />

756*
 

Posted By: <b>paulstratton</b><p>I'm of the opinion that a pitcher can "dominate" with a devastating circle change and masterful location. I guess you wouldn't classify Mathewson as dominant then? You are probably in the majority when you say his "stuff" wasn't dominating, I guess I just disagree.

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Jim Dale</b><p>Put an * by their names with an indication for PED at the bottom of the page...done

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Ken W.</b><p><img src="http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s290/triwak/128.jpg">

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Mike</b><p>Anyone see the Osama bin Laden tape today?<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />He is holding an *

756*
 

Posted By: <b>paulstratton</b><p>The guy(I missed his name) from Steiner Sports just estimated the ball at $350k.<br /><br />...and Joann, you're right about that guy in the #22 jersey. He deserved a few upper cuts, I hope someone got him with one. Where's Tbob when you need him?

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Cobby33</b><p>David-<br /><br />Thank you for your comments.<br /><br />With all due respect, I think that drawing an analogy between an alleged "cheater" in baseball and a pedophile is tenuous, at best. Furthermore, in the context of a discussion about a home run record, I think it is insipid to ask me what I would do if someone accused me of being a pedophile. I don't like to think about those things and will not dignify that absurd hypothetical (and query about whether it was true) with a response. That just goes to show the general mentality of those who are the forerunners of the Bonds hate parade.<br /><br />But- to respond to some of yours and others' points, allow me:<br /><br />1. In my view, Bonds has not sued those hack journalists for several reasons: (1) he has no cause of action. To educate you all, a public figure must show MALICE in order to prove a cause of action for Defamation. They must also prove DAMAGES. Bonds has not been damaged by the hollow accusations. He's making over $16M this year and there is no proof that he would have made more, but for the statements. (2) Not everyone in this society is litigious. Believe it or not, although I deal with plenty every day in my occupation, some of us aren't out to sue anyone and everyone. (3) When it comes down to it, Bonds doesn't give a rat's a** about what people think about him, which is probably why people have so much disdain for him.<br /><br />The whole notion of Bonds suing or not suing these "authors" is nothing more than a ripoff of the loose comments of Curt Schilling, who has proven that he is not particularly skilled at thinking before opening his mouth.<br /><br />2. "Circumstantial evidence" means nothing. Very few people are convicted of anything based upon mere circumstantial evidence. If Bonds' "cheating" had any teeth to it, don't you think some tangible, competent evidence would have surfaced by now? (Remind me to move if any of those who are willing to convict Bonds on this weak "evidence," become the prosecutor in my jurisdiction).<br /><br />3. My primary point in my first post was to share my experience at AT&T. I won't allow any of the single-minded people who are obsessed with vilfying Bonds (out of jelousy or whatever reason), ruin that. Again, Bonds is the legitimate career home run leader and at this point, nothing any of his critics can say will change that, so get over it.<br /><br /><br /><br />

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Marc</b><p>Well you have to wonder what Babe Ruth would have accomplished today? I truly believe the man would have hit over 1000 homeruns easily. Ruth wasted his first 6 YEARS in the game pitching. Ruth played in ballparks MUCH BIGGER - 450' to dead center field and 400' in the alleys in most parks. Ruth didn't get to use a maple bat - which has been thought to add much more distance to the ball. Ruth didn't get to play with todays baseballs which go much further than baseballs of his era. Ruth didn't get the advantage of facing pitchers on a level pitching mound - thus allowing a better view of the pitch. Ruth didn't get the advantage of facing weaker pitchers/players because there were less teams in the game - more players/teams equals diluted competition. More teams means you have more players who normally weren't good enough for the majors now in the majors.<br />And Ruth didn't have the advantage of steroids, human growth hormone, todays nutrition.<br /><br />The only argument against Ruth is he didn't face blacks or latin americans which would cancel out the weaker competition argument I gave above. Other than that, Ruth was BY FAR the superior player to Bonds. Remember, Ruth was one of the best pitcher in MLB before he was traded to the Yankees. If not for left field, Bonds couldn't even play anywhere on the diamond successfully. And Bonds playing left field successfully is a stretch. He was terrible every where else on the field. He would have had to been a DH in the American League.

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Dean H</b><p>I am in no way a Bonds fan. Also, I am in no way a Bonds hater but I do find all the "hate" directed at him excessive. I read this article about the record and an astericks this morning and found it very intertesting as it does add different perpective. I hope my link works. If not maybe someone can help me out.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19919795/" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19919795/</a><br /><br /><br />Also, I like Ruth as much as the next guy, but I remember reading that before 1933 any ball that bounced over the fence was ruled an HR instead of a ground rule double. It would be interesting if it could be determined how many of Ruth's HR's bounced over the wall. I doubt everyone of his 715 were mammoth shots. Also, Yankee stadium was a killer on right handed batteres. I believe Yankee stadium had a short porch in right field. Again, i am in no way trying to bring down the Babe. He is arguably the best ever. Sorry for any poor spelling and grammer.<br />

756*
 

Posted By: <b>MVSNYC</b><p>dean- i thought the whole "ball bouncing over the fence" rule was changed much earlier than 1933, but i did some quick research on the interent and here is what i found...<br /><br />"Prior to the 1930 American League season, and prior to the 1931 National League season, fly balls that bounced over or through the outfield fence were home runs! All batted balls that cleared or went through the fence on the fly or that were hit more than 250 feet in the air and cleared or went through the fence after a bounce in fair territory were counted as home runs. After the rule change the batter was awarded second base and these were called "automatic doubles" (ground-rule doubles are ballpark-specific rules) and are covered by rule 6.09(d)-(h) in the MLB Rule Book. <br /> <br />***Babe Ruth reportedly had no "bounce" home runs; Lou Gehrig had a few, so did Rogers Hornsby and many, many other players of that era."

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Jim Dale</b><p>Hearing Bond's comments on the radio, his voice, and the way he said that his record is "no way tainted" today just screams of foul play. I appreciate a fan like "cobby" above who enjoys it and has in his mind has a great hero to root for; but I will be the opposite. His record deserves an aesteric. It is not a criminal court; his proof does not have to be beyond a reasonable doubt and since his statements (not that I know of), affiliations (with Balco), and obvious presentation (gaining weight significantly and size) all provide evidence of the countrary - he'll never be a pure HR Record Champ in my book.

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Ed Ivey</b><p>Would bringing back the dead ball eliminate juicing?<br /><br />I say the record belongs to Roger Connor. Even the Babe is an asterisk.

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>should Gaylord Perry have an asterisk by his name for throwing spit balls?

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Dean H</b><p>Thanks Mike about the date correction. I got the 1933 from reading about Jimmy Foxx and his HR totals for that year. It had mentioned that rule change so I assumed it meant that year. Thanks for the clarification. Still it's hard to believe that none of Ruth's HR's were bounces. But I will definatley not argue the fact as I have no way to dispute it. Just a gut thing. Again, I view Ruth as one of the greatest, if not the greatest, of all time like many others. I just like to look all angles.

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Jimmy</b><p>MSN has a story about the ball and the highest paid sports items ever, they est. the ball at 500,000<br /><br />Jimmy

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Dean H</b><p>Maybe an asterick should be put by Gaylor Perry. If we as baseball fans are going to shun Bonds for "cheating" then we should shun all players that have "cheated" in the past, present and future. I'm sure there have been plenty. I think Bonds gets more heat because he is not the friendliest of people.

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Max Weder</b><p>Dean<br /><br />I was going to bring up Gaylord Perry's situation, and it is an interesting one. If Perry had admitted to an umpire in any particular game he was using a spitter, he would have been thrown out of the game and faced a suspension. His after induction confessionals have seemingly done little to tarnish his image, and have only invited semi-tepid debate as to his inclusion in the Hall of Fame.<br /><br />That said, on Bonds, and somewhat OT, I received an email link on the tax implications of Fan 756*'s catch. For anyone breathlessly interested in this fascinating issue, here's the url <a href="http://tinyurl.com/2kenoj" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/2kenoj</a><br /><br />Max<br /><br />IRS Circular 230 Disclosure<br /><br />To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any matters addressed herein.<br />

756*
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Cobby, I disagree on the issue of circumstantial evidence: people are convicted every day with "just" circumstantial evidence. As for Bonds, there is a ton of evidence that he juiced, only some of it being circumstantial. There is direct evidence, eyewitness evidence, etc. etc. The reason Bonds has not been indicted yet is because he is not being investigated for steroid abuse -- he is being investigated for perjury which is a tough thing to prove in federal court. Bonds reminds me of Jim Baker and Jimmy Swaggart before their falls: loud protestations of innocence and good values did not make them any less soiled.

756*
 

Posted By: <b>David Smith</b><p>To all,<br /><br />I am a baseball fan but also a fan of fair play. If a player on my favorite team was found to have used/abused PED's, I would just as vigorously denounce him.<br /><br />I played sports for many years and was taught to play hard, play the right way and always try to do your best. However, even doing that, sometimes another player or team is better than you, at least on that day and you are going to lose. I didn't like that but I accepted it as being part of the game. What changed my mind about losing, especially to cheaters, was a middle school football game.<br /><br />My team was playing an away game and the score was close in the Third Quarter. During a play, our Quarterback's chin strap came loose and the Ref gave him a 15 yard penalty because of safety reasons. No warning, just a straight penalty. A few plays later, a Defensive player from the other team grabbed our Quarterback's chin strap and tore it off his helmet. Again, the same Ref gave us a 15 yard penalty. Our Coach came out on the field to complain and HE was given a 15 yard penalty for unsportsmanlike conduct. We had to Punt and they went on to score and win the game by four points. From that point on, I HATED cheaters.<br /><br />There are a couple of other incidents of cheating I could talk about but they would take a long time to tell the whole story, so I wont.<br /><br />As far as PED's go, I can see where a fringe player might use them just to get to or stay in the Show. But Barry Bonds was not a fringe player. He had no NEED to use/abuse PED's. The only reason he did was because his self-centered ego was hurt.<br /><br />To me, Bonds breaking of the Home Run record should be treated like it never happened (because it shouldn't have) it should be a non-event.<br /><br />As far as circumstantial evidence, aren't people jailed every day because of it??<br /><br />If Bonds didn't do anything illegal or against the rules, then why is his Personal Trainer in jail and why does he refuse to testify?? Seems like if Bonds had nothing to hide then Greg Anderson would feel free to testify about anything the Government wanted to ask him.<br /><br />Why did the scientist who worked for BALCO and who created the "clear" say that Bonds was on "the program"??<br /><br />Why did Gary Sheffield, another accused cheater, go to live with Bonds for a while so he could work out with him, suddenly leave his house and call Bonds a control freak?? If Bonds is such a control freak, then why did he take someone's word that what he was ingesting or putting on his body was only Flaxseed oil, especially after he started to grow BIG real FAST??<br /><br />Bonds KNEW what he was doing was wrong and did it anyway. He didn't have to cheat to put up Hall Of Fame numbers but he did and so far, he is breaking records he shouldn't be, getting paid millions of dollars he shouldn't be and getting away with it. On top of that, fans (and ESPN) are falling all over themselves praising and cheering Bonds along.<br /><br />If fans are willing to cheer Barry Bonds then they shouldn't complain about trimmed or altered cards. Bonds cheated to break records and make more money and people who trim or otherwise alter cards are also doing so to improve them so as to make more money.<br /><br />Same peas, same pod.<br /><br />David