Mitchell's report to reveal many names

**gabs485** · 12-13-2007, 03:24 PM

Re: Mitchell's report to reveal many names

Originally posted by TJdaSportsGuy

I really hope you know I was joking. Just because a player isn't named in this report, it doesn't mean he's clean. It just means this particular investigation turned up nothing on the guy. There's probably hundreds of other players who did juice and got lucky not to be mentioned in this report.

by lucky you mean covered right?

**Brandon13** · 12-13-2007, 03:24 PM

Re: Mitchell's report to reveal many names

I was expecting to see Javy Lopez named but I guess neither of these two guys had ties to him.

**Psyblast** · 12-13-2007, 03:26 PM

Re: Mitchell's report to reveal many names

Whaaaaat, Rob Parker's going to be on next?

**SPTO** · 12-13-2007, 03:26 PM

Re: Mitchell's report to reveal many names

Originally posted by Jistic

Dude, there's no doubt. Believe me, this will blow up. Baseball will get dragged through the coals again, because they didn't.....step up to the plate. In the end they'll make it harder on themselves. It's so pathetic that it's funny.

I agree with this, there's just too much out there and too much doubt for this to just all blow over. MLB is going to get killed in the court of public opinion and on Capital Hill.

MLB could be screwing the other pro leagues as the idea of a universal sanctioning body is not as outlandish an idea as it was 10-15 years ago. Trust me, this should've been done ages ago and now because of the impurity of America's Pastime everyone is going to pay.

**lbartlett_32** · 12-13-2007, 03:26 PM

Re: Mitchell's report to reveal many names

Originally posted by Jistic

Dude, there's no doubt. Believe me, this will blow up. Baseball will get dragged through the coals again, because they didn't.....step up to the plate. In the end they'll make it harder on themselves. It's so pathetic that it's funny.

Agreed. I just can't beleive that they are using the integrity word. I could believe it. Integrity? Now? You gotta be kiddin' me.

**BigDofBA** · 12-13-2007, 03:27 PM

Re: Mitchell's report to reveal many names

I'll admit it. I bought Canseco's book when it first came out.

After reading it I believed everything he said. I don't know why but I just did. The details he gave were pretty vivid and a lot of things he said seemed to tie together and make a lot of sense.

People bashed him. I remember when people were saying, "He said Palmeiro did roids. There is no way. Palmeiro isn't on the juice." Then Raffy proceeded to fail a drug test.

Canseco may be a jerk but I believe what he was saying.

**Lintyfresh85** · 12-13-2007, 03:27 PM

Re: Mitchell's report to reveal many names

No Albert makes me smile.

Players are dumb as hell though paying with checks... they should know by now you don't leave a money trail whether it be two timing with women or buying steroids... you cover your tracks!

**The C** · 12-13-2007, 03:28 PM

Re: Mitchell's report to reveal many names

Originally posted by Psyblast

Whaaaaat, Rob Parker's going to be on next?

Isn't that the fake-host of Cheap Seats?

**lbartlett_32** · 12-13-2007, 03:28 PM

Re: Mitchell's report to reveal many names

Another thing that has baffled me is the stupidity of these players. Writing checks? Try buyin a dime bag with a credit card next time why don'tcha.

**SPTO** · 12-13-2007, 03:28 PM

Re: Mitchell's report to reveal many names

Originally posted by Lintyfresh85

No Albert makes me smile.

Players are dumb as hell though paying with checks... they should know by now you don't leave a money trail whether it be two timing with women or buying steroids... you cover your tracks!

I wonder if any players used Paypal? rofl that'd be pretty funny.

**Sandman42** · 12-13-2007, 03:29 PM

Re: Mitchell's report to reveal many names

Anyone else find it funny that basically every single player on this list is a result of Radomski's testifying. If he never agreed to anything there would be like 10 names on this list.

**lbartlett_32** · 12-13-2007, 03:30 PM

Re: Mitchell's report to reveal many names

Originally posted by Sandman42

Anyone else find it funny that basically every single player on this list is a result of Radomski's testifying. If he never agreed to anything there would be like 10 names on this list.

They would gave just found another snitch on down the list and would have brought out names.

**Pared** · 12-13-2007, 03:31 PM

Re: Mitchell's report to reveal many names

Originally posted by Sandman42

Anyone else find it funny that basically every single player on this list is a result of Radomski's testifying. If he never agreed to anything there would be like 10 names on this list.

Which makes you believe there are others out there keeping their trap shut.

**DonkeyJote** · 12-13-2007, 03:31 PM

Re: Mitchell's report to reveal many names

Originally posted by SPTO

The big question I have now is what MLB will do with the current players on the list. I truly believe they need to retroactively suspend every one of them and not just 15 games but rather half a year or something like that.

That would be against labor laws. If the MLB did that, the union would appeal and win easily. You can't suspend someone from work for breaking a 4 year old rule 8 years ago. It's against the law. Mitchell even said that in his press conference.

And I personally feel like anyone who did steroids before it was illegal shouldn't have records or anything else affected. It was very wide spread, and we have no way of knowing that players from generations past didn't use amphetamines or something.

**Double-J** · 12-13-2007, 03:32 PM

Re: Mitchell's report to reveal many names

Originally posted by Sandman42

Anyone else find it funny that basically every single player on this list is a result of Radomski's testifying. If he never agreed to anything there would be like 10 names on this list.

Doesn't that essentially show the validity (or lack thereof) of this report? I mean, the credibility has been questioned from the beginning, but their biggest sources are two trainers for the NY teams...not exactly 'sweeping,' I suppose.

Mitchell's report to reveal many names

Recommended Videos

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment