PDA

View Full Version : Clemens is no different than Bonds



bluedog
December 13th, 2007, 10:32 PM
Year after year he peddled the same garbage, Roger Clemens (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=dw-clemenssteroidsearly121307&prov=yhoo&type=lgns)was so dominant for so long because he simply outworked everyone. It played to the nation's Puritan roots, made Clemens out to be this everyman maximizing his skills through singular focus, dedication and a commitment to drinking carrot juice, or something.

It's all gone now, the legend of Rocket Roger dead on arrival of the Mitchell Report; one of the greatest pitchers of all time, his seven Cy Youngs and 354 career victories lost to history under a pile of lies and syringes.

Clemens was injected with performance-enhancing drugs and human growth hormones by his former trainer starting in 2000 and continuing many times through the years, trainer Brian McNamee told George Mitchell in great detail.

Grizalltheway
December 13th, 2007, 10:40 PM
*Waits for JoltinJoe to break down the door*

ngineer
December 13th, 2007, 10:48 PM
So for the 'integrity of the game'..are these yahoos getting into Cooperstown?? How does this compare with Pete Rose twisting in limbo-land? Didn't these guys do more to harm the game than Pete?

blackfordpu
December 13th, 2007, 10:49 PM
Wipe them all from the books!

TheValleyRaider
December 13th, 2007, 10:51 PM
So for the 'integrity of the game'..are these yahoos getting into Cooperstown??

Yes, they are (or at least should be) going to Cooperstown

Both of them

AZGrizFan
December 13th, 2007, 11:43 PM
I have now officially changed my position. With the release of this report, I fully believe this list only scratches the surface and Jose Canseco was right (JESUS, it's hard to say that.) There were, in all likelihood, hundreds of players using the juice, and HGH. With that being said, although I've been an ardent supporter of Bonds NOT getting into the hall. I now firmly believe all the "hall-worthy" numbers should get into the hall, in a wing entitled "The Steroids Era". At least that way, they're held in the context in which their numbers were "earned".

I say, let 'em all in....Bonds, McGuire, Clemens, and anybody else who has hall worthy numbers in the era from 1990-2007. The real question is: In this drug-induced numbers era, WHAT makes a player hall-worthy? Since there were both pitchers and hitters on the sauce, does it ultimately even out the playing field (figuratively speaking of course)?

Who knows....if I were a bettin' man, I'd say those who have the numbers get in, just not on the first ballot, and certainly not unanimously (as I'm sure Bonds would have been had he not been embroiled in this...)

xcoffeex

Poly Pigskin
December 14th, 2007, 01:14 AM
Wipe them all from the books!

I don't think you can wipe Clemens from the books based on the story of one questionable individual, who was facing jail time if he didn't talk. I wouldn't be surprised if he was juiced (nothing surprises me anymore), I'd just like to see something a little more concrete, like drug orders in his name or something along those lines.

bluedog
December 14th, 2007, 01:17 AM
I have now officially changed my position. With the release of this report, I fully believe this list only scratches the surface and Jose Canseco was right (JESUS, it's hard to say that.) There were, in all likelihood, hundreds of players using the juice, and HGH. With that being said, although I've been an ardent supporter of Bonds NOT getting into the hall. I now firmly believe all the "hall-worthy" numbers should get into the hall, in a wing entitled "The Steroids Era". At least that way, they're held in the context in which their numbers were "earned".

I say, let 'em all in....Bonds, McGuire, Clemens, and anybody else who has hall worthy numbers in the era from 1990-2007. The real question is: In this drug-induced numbers era, WHAT makes a player hall-worthy? Since there were both pitchers and hitters on the sauce, does it ultimately even out the playing field (figuratively speaking of course)?

Who knows....if I were a bettin' man, I'd say those who have the numbers get in, just not on the first ballot, and certainly not unanimously (as I'm sure Bonds would have been had he not been embroiled in this...)

xcoffeex

And what you just said only proves what a certain segment of America knew all along once again.

"When it just us it's call Justice" "When it's them it's call mercy"

JoltinJoe
December 14th, 2007, 05:35 AM
I don't think you can wipe Clemens from the books based on the story of one questionable individual, who was facing jail time if he didn't talk. I wouldn't be surprised if he was juiced (nothing surprises me anymore), I'd just like to see something a little more concrete, like drug orders in his name or something along those lines.

There is significant difference between Bonds and Clemens pertaining to the quality and quantity of evidence of their steroid use.

As you note, the only evidence cited in the report against Clemens was McNamee's statements, which he made under the threat of indictment.

To treat the accusation against Clemens as if its rooted firmly in something more credible than that, as everyone seems to be doing, is a media snow job.

Read the report for yourself; in fact, the report implicitly concedes that Mitchell could find no corroborative evidence to support McNamee's statements.

This isn't to say that Clemens never used steroids. But I think it is irresponsible to go public with an accusation, and essentially announce that you accept the truth of that accusation, based only on the statement of "co-conspirator" made while he labored under a threat of indictment.

IMO, Mitchell employed the lowest standards of "proof" before declaring guilt. No name should have been included in the report based solely on the say-so of a "co-conspirator." Statements like the ones attributed to McNamee should have been corroborated by some other piece of evidence before being published in the report.

Mitchell knew that what he reported was going to find wide acceptance. He abused the public's trust by not reporting with greater care and by including some players based on some highly questionable and uncorroborated evidence.

Here's an interesting quote from Gene Wojciechowski on espn.com:

The Mitchell investigation was doomed from the beginning. The report itself is 409 pages of cotton candy -- wisps of truth teased into a Don King hairdo full of air, hearsay and perhaps wishful thinking. Blow softly on it and it bends and rips apart.

I don't fault Mitchell for its failure. He was asked to dig into the steroids era without being given a shovel. Had he not piggybacked onto several ongoing government investigations, the Mitchell report might have been the length of a Del Taco menu.

FCS Preview
December 14th, 2007, 06:10 AM
Pete Rose should be in the HoF.

BlueHen86
December 14th, 2007, 06:17 AM
And what you just said only proves what a certain segment of America knew all along once again.

"When it just us it's call Justice" "When it's them it's call mercy"
How so?
As far as I'm concerned there is no difference between Bonds and Clemens (which is the title you gave this thread), they deserve the same fate, whatever that happens to be.

Seahawks Fan
December 14th, 2007, 07:12 AM
Year after year he peddled the same garbage, Roger Clemens (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=dw-clemenssteroidsearly121307&prov=yhoo&type=lgns)was so dominant for so long because he simply outworked everyone. It played to the nation's Puritan roots, made Clemens out to be this everyman maximizing his skills through singular focus, dedication and a commitment to drinking carrot juice, or something.

It's all gone now, the legend of Rocket Roger dead on arrival of the Mitchell Report; one of the greatest pitchers of all time, his seven Cy Youngs and 354 career victories lost to history under a pile of lies and syringes.

Clemens was injected with performance-enhancing drugs and human growth hormones by his former trainer starting in 2000 and continuing many times through the years, trainer Brian McNamee told George Mitchell in great detail.

I completely agree with you. No HOF for any of these cheats.

HIU 93
December 14th, 2007, 07:39 AM
There is significant difference between Bonds and Clemens pertaining to the quality and quantity of evidence of their steroid use.

As you note, the only evidence cited in the report against Clemens was McNamee's statements, which he made under the threat of indictment.

To treat the accusation against Clemens as if its rooted firmly in something more credible than that, as everyone seems to be doing, is a media snow job.

Read the report for yourself; in fact, the report implicitly concedes that Mitchell could find no corroborative evidence to support McNamee's statements.

This isn't to say that Clemens never used steroids. But I think it is irresponsible to go public with an accusation, and essentially announce that you accept the truth of that accusation, based only on the statement of "co-conspirator" made while he labored under a threat of indictment.

IMO, Mitchell employed the lowest standards of "proof" before declaring guilt. No name should have been included in the report based solely on the say-so of a "co-conspirator." Statements like the ones attributed to McNamee should have been corroborated by some other piece of evidence before being published in the report.

Mitchell knew that what he reported was going to find wide acceptance. He abused the public's trust by not reporting with greater care and by including some players based on some highly questionable and uncorroborated evidence.

Here's an interesting quote from Gene Wojciechowski on espn.com:

The Mitchell investigation was doomed from the beginning. The report itself is 409 pages of cotton candy -- wisps of truth teased into a Don King hairdo full of air, hearsay and perhaps wishful thinking. Blow softly on it and it bends and rips apart.

I don't fault Mitchell for its failure. He was asked to dig into the steroids era without being given a shovel. Had he not piggybacked onto several ongoing government investigations, the Mitchell report might have been the length of a Del Taco menu.

1. The last I checked, there was no concrete evidence against most of these guys (positive drug tests, convictions) nor has there been any due process afforded these guys. This whole thing smacks of McCarthyism to me.

2. We should all throw Bonds under the bus, but give "Mr All-AMerican" Clemens a free pass? Sounds "good ole boy"ish to me.

andy7171
December 14th, 2007, 07:51 AM
All I know is Frank Thomas looks like a clean true HOF'er in the middle of this Steriod Era!

JoltinJoe
December 14th, 2007, 08:11 AM
1. The last I checked, there was no concrete evidence against most of these guys (positive drug tests, convictions) nor has there been any due process afforded these guys. This whole thing smacks of McCarthyism to me.

2. We should all throw Bonds under the bus, but give "Mr All-AMerican" Clemens a free pass? Sounds "good ole boy"ish to me.

I never said to throw Bonds under the bus.

I only noted that there is more evidence against Bonds than there is against Clemens (such as the doping calendar).

The case against neither is concrete, but I think the case against Clemens depends on the statement of one person under threat of indictment. Thus, the proof against Clemens is weaker.

Although, the indictment against Bonds is over-the-top and it's time for the Bonds witch-hunt to come to an end.

Gil Dobie
December 14th, 2007, 08:15 AM
The Selig Steroid Era really stinks xsmhx xsmhx xsmhx

BlueHen86
December 14th, 2007, 08:38 AM
The Selig Steroid Era really stinks xsmhx xsmhx xsmhx
Well stated.

AZGrizFan
December 14th, 2007, 09:56 AM
And what you just said only proves what a certain segment of America knew all along once again.

"When it just us it's call Justice" "When it's them it's call mercy"

When you say "just us", you mean.....????? xconfusedx xconfusedx xconfusedx

AZGrizFan
December 14th, 2007, 09:57 AM
1. The last I checked, there was no concrete evidence against most of these guys (positive drug tests, convictions) nor has there been any due process afforded these guys. This whole thing smacks of McCarthyism to me.

2. We should all throw Bonds under the bus, but give "Mr All-AMerican" Clemens a free pass? Sounds "good ole boy"ish to me.


Oh, go ahead and say it: It looks like a black/white thing to you. xrolleyesx

Gil Dobie
December 14th, 2007, 09:58 AM
When you say "just us", you mean.....????? xconfusedx xconfusedx xconfusedx

More important, who is them xconfusedx

AZGrizFan
December 14th, 2007, 09:58 AM
More important, who is them xconfusedx

The second part of a two part question....xeyebrowx xeyebrowx xeyebrowx

HIU 93
December 14th, 2007, 10:24 AM
Oh, go ahead and say it: It looks like a black/white thing to you. xrolleyesx

No. It looks lile a Barry-hating thing. That list had other Black players. Y'all are trying to make this racial, when it isn't. belive me, if it were all about race, I'd let you know.

For the life of me, I still can't figure out why y'all hate Barry Bonds. I mean, y'all foam at the mouth anytime his name is mentioned. Did he fcuk your wife? Slap you in the face? Steal from you? I am willing to bet you have never spoken to or met the man.

I didn't give a stream of rat piss about Barry Bond's one way or another- until y'all started with the "Kill Bonds" mantra of the last ten years. that has made me a Bond's fan.

PS- since you are wondering who folks are talking about today, "y'all" refers to y'all Barry haters.

Gil Dobie
December 14th, 2007, 10:31 AM
PS- since you are wondering who folks are talking about today, "y'all" refers to y'all Barry haters.

y'all don't have an opinion, except he's on the list of cheaters with Roger Clemens. Cheaters are fair game for sarcasm and criticism. Haven't heard a good thing said about Mark McGwire since his appearance in front of congress. At least Barry Bonds has some supporters. xeyebrowx

UNHWildCats
December 14th, 2007, 10:41 AM
http://www.uploaderrr.com/pix/30/RoidRage.gif

HIU 93
December 14th, 2007, 10:44 AM
y'all don't have an opinion, except he's on the list of cheaters with Roger Clemens. Cheaters are fair game for sarcasm and criticism. Haven't heard a good thing said about Mark McGwire since his appearance in front of congress. At least Barry Bonds has some supporters. xeyebrowx

Cool. I can respect your opinion, even thought I disagree with it, because you are singling out one player. Other folks are still focusing on one man.

UNHWildCats
December 14th, 2007, 10:50 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuoLCZroKrg

Lehigh Football Nation
December 14th, 2007, 10:50 AM
I feel Clemens and Bonds should be treated equally. As should Sosa, McGwire, Palmeiro, and the litany of other people mentioned in this report. They're a bunch of cheaters, and deserve our scorn. They also shouldn't be in the hall of fame.

If you think that they should be in the hall-of-fame, logically you should also be championing Floyd Landis' Tour De France win, Ben Johnson's Olympic Gold Medal or any number of steroid-tainted victories. Cheating is cheating.

I happen to think that anyone with cancelled checks in the report ought to be banned from baseball. It's the right thing to do.

Marcus Garvey
December 14th, 2007, 10:51 AM
Clemens has always been a d!ck. He's done a far better job of hiding it through the years as opposed to Bonds, who would ***** on the clubhouse boy for his own amusment.

I don't like Clemens very much either. The other big difference between the two is that Clemens tried, though not very well, to be liked by the public and get endorsements. Whereas Bonds enjoyed being the bad guy.

BlueHen86
December 14th, 2007, 11:07 AM
I feel Clemens and Bonds should be treated equally. As should Sosa, McGwire, Palmeiro, and the litany of other people mentioned in this report. They're a bunch of cheaters, and deserve our scorn. They also shouldn't be in the hall of fame.

If you think that they should be in the hall-of-fame, logically you should also be championing Floyd Landis' Tour De France win, Ben Johnson's Olympic Gold Medal or any number of steroid-tainted victories. Cheating is cheating.

I happen to think that anyone with cancelled checks in the report ought to be banned from baseball. It's the right thing to do.
I don't think Sosa and McGwire are mentioned in the report.xeyebrowx
Not sure about Palmeiro.

BlueHen86
December 14th, 2007, 11:14 AM
http://www.uploaderrr.com/pix/30/RoidRage.gif


xlmaox

NE MT GRIZZ
December 14th, 2007, 12:13 PM
I don't think Sosa and McGwire are mentioned in the report.xeyebrowx
Not sure about Palmeiro.


They were mentioned, but not accused like most of the others.

I think McGwire should get a pass. He never failed a drug test, the only thing we know he took was Andro, a legal supplement at the time, and even if he was juicing, steroids weren't illegal in baseball at the time.

And as the report shows, a lot of pitchers he was facing were juicing.

Marcus Garvey
December 14th, 2007, 12:19 PM
They were mentioned, but not accused like most of the others.

I think McGwire should get a pass. He never failed a drug test, the only thing we know he took was Andro, a legal supplement at the time, and even if he was juicing, steroids weren't illegal in baseball at the time.

And as the report shows, a lot of pitchers he was facing were juicing.

That's the biggest bull***** argument I've heard, though you aren't alone in voicing it. Steroids were illegal PERIOD! They were used illegally, even if the rules didn't explicitly prohibit them. Therefore, ballplayer do not deserve a pass.

By that logic, a ballplayer can have an opposing pitcher killed, to improve his team's chances against the pitcher's team. Afterall, there are no rules in MLB regarding contract killings! xrolleyesx

AZGrizFan
December 14th, 2007, 12:22 PM
No. It looks lile a Barry-hating thing. That list had other Black players. Y'all are trying to make this racial, when it isn't. belive me, if it were all about race, I'd let you know.

For the life of me, I still can't figure out why y'all hate Barry Bonds. I mean, y'all foam at the mouth anytime his name is mentioned. Did he fcuk your wife? Slap you in the face? Steal from you? I am willing to bet you have never spoken to or met the man.

I didn't give a stream of rat piss about Barry Bond's one way or another- until y'all started with the "Kill Bonds" mantra of the last ten years. that has made me a Bond's fan.

PS- since you are wondering who folks are talking about today, "y'all" refers to y'all Barry haters.

I've never "hated" Barry. And I've seen how he speaks to people, so I don't have to meet him to know he's an ass. That aside, I just didn't think he belonged in the hall. And as I stated earlier, I have changed my stance.

NE MT GRIZZ
December 14th, 2007, 12:47 PM
That's the biggest bull***** argument I've heard, though you aren't alone in voicing it. Steroids were illegal PERIOD! They were used illegally, even if the rules didn't explicitly prohibit them. Therefore, ballplayer do not deserve a pass.

By that logic, a ballplayer can have an opposing pitcher killed, to improve his team's chances against the pitcher's team. Afterall, there are no rules in MLB regarding contract killings! xrolleyesx


MG,

How many players are going to the HOF that were juicing that we will never know? The Mitchell Report is just scratching the surface. That's why I say let the players in who have never been proven to take anything, and keep the ones out who were stupid enough to keep using once a testing program was in place.

Marcus Garvey
December 14th, 2007, 01:03 PM
MG,

How many players are going to the HOF that were juicing that we will never know? The Mitchell Report is just scratching the surface. That's why I say let the players in who have never been proven to take anything, and keep the ones out who were stupid enough to keep using once a testing program was in place.

That wasn't the entire argument you made. You also said it wasn't against MLB rules. I was calling "bull*****" on you.
I agree with just saying "fuhgeddaboutit," but only because we cannot be 100% sure. Not because it wasn't "against the MLB rules." That particular point is, as I said, bull*****.

NE MT GRIZZ
December 14th, 2007, 01:15 PM
That wasn't the entire argument you made. You also said it wasn't against MLB rules. I was calling "bull*****" on you.
I agree with just saying "fuhgeddaboutit," but only because we cannot be 100% sure. Not because it wasn't "against the MLB rules." That particular point is, as I said, bull*****.

Good call MG, I need to proof myself. I should have said "No testing policy" instead of illegal.

bluedog
December 14th, 2007, 07:12 PM
Oh, go ahead and say it: It looks like a black/white thing to you. xrolleyesx

Well this guy said it was and he also said if he told all the list would be to long to read.

http://www.wisecamel.com/images/Canseco%20B%20and%20A%202.jpg

But hey, what does he know xlolx

JoltinJoe
December 15th, 2007, 12:31 PM
Roger Clemens was included in this report based on the statement of one man who avoided being prosecuted by offering up Clemens's name.

That's the weakest type of evidence in the eyes of the law.

There is no corroborative evidence. None of the documents attached to the report deal with Clemens.

Don't believe me. Read for yourself.

Roger Clemens

Roger Clemens is a pitcher who, from 1984 to 2007, played for four teams in Major League Baseball, the Boston Red Sox (13 seasons), Toronto Blue Jays (2 seasons), New York Yankees (6 seasons), and Houston Astros (3 seasons). He has won more than 350 games, seven Cy Young Awards, and was the American League Most Valuable Player in 1986. He was named to All-Star teams eleven times.

During the Radomski investigation, federal law enforcement officials identified Brian McNamee as one of Radomski’s customers and a possible sub-distributor. McNamee, through his attorney, entered into a written agreement with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California. The agreement provides that McNamee will cooperate with the
U.S. Attorney’s Office. No truthful statements can be used against McNamee in any federal prosecution by that Office; if, however, he should be untruthful in any statements made pursuant to that agreement, he may be charged with criminal violations, including making false
statements, which is a felony.

As part of his cooperation with the U.S. Attorney’s Office, and at its request, McNamee agreed to three interviews by me and my staff, one in person and two by telephone. McNamee’s personal lawyer participated in the interviews. Also participating were federal prosecutors and agents from the F.B.I. and the Internal Revenue Service. On each occasion,
McNamee was advised that he could face criminal charges if he made any false statements during these interviews, which were deemed by the prosecutors to be subject to his written agreement with the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

Comment: This effort to create credibility for McNamee is misleading public. Any attorney asked to comment would also remind you that it is also important to consider that, if McNamee did not give statements to the prosecutors, he no doubt would have been charged with felonious distribution of controlled dangerous substances. To reflect appropriate balance, the Mitchell Report should have also included that observation.

McNamee attended St. John’s University in New York from 1985 to 1989,
majoring in athletic administration. At St. John’s, he played baseball. From 1990 to May 1993, he was a New York City police officer.

In 1993, McNamee met Tim McCleary, the assistant general manager of the
New York Yankees, who also had attended St. John’s. McCleary hired McNamee as a bullpen catcher and batting practice pitcher for the New York Yankees. In 1995, McNamee was released from his duties after Joe Torre was named the new Yankees manager. From 1995 to 1998,
McNamee trained “Olympic caliber athletes” outside of baseball.

In 1995, McCleary was hired as the assistant general manager for the Toronto Blue Jays. In 1998, that club hired McNamee as its strength and conditioning coach, and he served in that position from 1998 to 2000.

Roger Clemens signed with Toronto in 1997, after spending the first thirteen years of his career with the Red Sox. After McNamee began working for the Blue Jays in 1998, he and Clemens both lived at the Toronto SkyDome (there is a hotel attached to the stadium).
McNamee and Clemens became close professionally while in Toronto, but they were not close socially or personally.

Jose Canseco was playing for the Blue Jays in 1998. On or about June 8-10, 1998, the Toronto Blue Jays played an away series with the Florida Marlins. McNamee attended a lunch party that Canseco hosted at his home in Miami. McNamee stated that, during this luncheon, he observed Clemens, Canseco, and another person he did not know meeting inside
Canseco’s house, although McNamee did not personally attend that meeting. Canseco told members of my investigative staff that he had numerous conversations with Clemens about the benefits of Deca-Durabolin and Winstrol and how to “cycle” and “stack” steroids. Canseco has made similar statements publicly.

Toward the end of the road trip which included the Marlins series, or shortly after the Blue Jays returned home to Toronto, Clemens approached McNamee and, for the first time, brought up the subject of using steroids. Clemens said that he was not able to inject himself, and he asked for McNamee’s help.

Later that summer, Clemens asked McNamee to inject him with Winstrol, which Clemens supplied. McNamee knew the substance was Winstrol because the vials Clemens gave him were so labeled. McNamee injected Clemens approximately four times in the buttocks over a several-week period with needles that Clemens provided. Each incident took place in
Clemens’s apartment at the SkyDome. McNamee never asked Clemens where he obtained the steroids.

During the 1998 season (around the time of the injections), Clemens showed McNamee a white bottle of Anadrol-50.386 Clemens told McNamee he was not using it but wanted to know more about it. McNamee told Clemens not to use it. McNamee said he took the Anadrol 50 bottle and gave it to Canseco.387 McNamee does not know where Clemens obtained the Anadrol-50.

According to McNamee, from the time that McNamee injected Clemens with
Winstrol through the end of the 1998 season, Clemens’s performance showed remarkable improvement. During this period of improved performance, Clemens told McNamee that the steroids “had a pretty good effect” on him. McNamee said that Clemens also was training harder
and dieting better during this time.

In 1999, Clemens was traded to the New York Yankees. McNamee remained
under contract with the Blue Jays for the 1999 season. In 2000, the Yankees hired McNamee as the assistant strength and conditioning coach under Jeff Mangold. According to McNamee, the Yankees hired him because Clemens persuaded them to do so. In this capacity, McNamee
worked with all of the Yankees players. McNamee was paid both by the Yankees and by Clemens personally. Clemens hired McNamee to train him during portions of several weeks in the off-season. McNamee also trained Clemens personally for one to two weeks during spring training and a few times during the season. McNamee served as the Yankees’ assistant strength and conditioning coach through the 2001 season.

Continued in the Next Post

JoltinJoe
December 15th, 2007, 12:32 PM
McNamee first learned about Kirk Radomski through David Segui during the
2000 season. Also that season, McNamee obtained Radomski’s telephone number from Jason Grimsley. McNamee wanted to buy a Lexus, and Radomski had a connection with a Lexus dealer. Radomski recalled that Grimsley was a frequent customer for performance enhancing substances, and he produced nine checks written by Grimsley to Radomski during 2001 and 2002 and fourteen checks in total.

According to McNamee, during the middle of the 2000 season Clemens made it clear that he was ready to use steroids again. During the latter part of the regular season, McNamee injected Clemens in the buttocks four to six times with testosterone from a bottle labeled either Sustanon 250 or Deca-Durabolin that McNamee had obtained from Radomski.
McNamee stated that during this same time period he also injected Clemens four to six times with human growth hormone he received from Radomski, after explaining to Clemens the potential benefits and risks of use. McNamee believed that it was probably his idea that Clemens try human growth hormone. Radomski instructed McNamee how to inject human growth hormone. On each occasion, McNamee administered the injections at Clemens’s apartment in New York City.

McNamee said that he and Clemens did not have any conversations regarding performance enhancing substances from late 2000 until August 2001. McNamee did, however, train Clemens and Andy Pettitte during the off-season at their homes in Houston. Clemens often invited other major league players who lived in the Houston area to train with him.
McNamee’s training relationship with Clemens and others has been described publicly. Peter Gammons reported during spring training 2001:
Brandon Smith, an apprentice trainer with the Yankees, describes Roger
Clemens’ day as follows: “He’s one of the first players in every morning,
runs, does his program with Andy Pettitte, does the team program
workout, goes to the weight room, leaves, plays 18 holes of golf and
finally meets (trainer) Brian McNamee at 6 .. . . and a few other players –
for another workout. It’s incredible how much energy Roger has.”

According to McNamee, Clemens advised him in August 2001 that he was again ready to use steroids. Shortly thereafter, McNamee injected Clemens with Sustanon or Deca-Durabolin on four to five occasions at Clemens’s apartment. According to McNamee, he again obtained these drugs from Kirk Radomski. McNamee concluded from Clemens’s statements and conduct that Clemens did not like using human growth hormone (Clemens told him that he did not like the “bellybutton shot”). To McNamee’s knowledge, Clemens did not use human growth hormone in 2001.
McNamee was not retained by the Yankees after the 2001 season. After that season, Clemens never again asked McNamee to inject him with performance enhancing substances, and McNamee had no further discussions with Clemens about such substances.

McNamee stated that Clemens did not tell him why he stopped asking him to administer performance enhancing substances, and McNamee has no knowledge about whether Clemens used performance enhancing substances after 2001.

During the years that McNamee stated he facilitated Clemens’s use of steroids and human growth hormone, McNamee’s discussions with Clemens about use of these drugs were limited. McNamee assumed that Clemens used performance enhancing substances during the second half of the season so that he would not tire, but they did not discuss this directly. It
was Clemens who made the decision when he would use anabolic steroids or human growth hormone. McNamee stated that he tried to educate Clemens about these substances; he “gave him as much information as possible.”

Clemens continued to train with McNamee after he was dismissed by the
Yankees, according to both McNamee and press reports. In October 2006, after the Los Angeles Times reported that the names of Clemens and McNamee were among those that had been redacted from an affidavit in support of a search warrant for the residence of Jason Grimsley as
allegedly involved with the illegal use of performance enhancing substances, Clemens was reported to have said: “I’ll continue to use Mac [McNamee] to train me. He’s one of a kind.”

McNamee was quoted in a December 10, 2006 news article on steroids as
reportedly having said: “I never, ever gave Clemens or Pettitte steroids. They never asked me for steroids. The only thing they asked me for were vitamins.” McNamee told us that he was accurately quoted but that he did not tell the truth to the reporter who interviewed him. He
explained that he was trying to protect his reputation.

On May 15, 2007, the New York Daily News reported that Clemens had cut ties to McNamee. McNamee denied that and told us that he trained Clemens after the article was published. He added that Clemens now has a home in the New York area, and McNamee personally installed a gym there.

McNamee stated that he has no ill will toward Clemens and “was always ahead [financially] with Roger.” McNamee received money for expenses from Clemens’s business representatives. They paid McNamee for training Clemens, and for his expenses. From time to time Clemens also gave McNamee “extra money.” Clemens never gave money to McNamee
specifically to buy performance enhancing substances.

Kirk Radomski recalled meeting McNamee through David Segui. Radomski
confirmed that he supplied McNamee with human growth hormone and anabolic steroids from 2000 to 2004. Although McNamee never told Radomski the performance enhancing substances obtained were for anything other than McNamee’s personal use, Radomski concluded that
McNamee was distributing the substances to others based on the amounts he purchased and the timing of the purchases.

Radomski knew McNamee was acting as personal trainer for Roger Clemens,
Andy Pettitte, and Chuck Knoblauch (among others), and he suspected McNamee was giving the performance enhancing substances to some of his clients. Occasionally, McNamee acknowledged good performances by Knoblauch or Clemens by “dropping hints,” such as “[h]e’s on the program now.” McNamee never explicitly told Radomski that either Clemens or
Pettitte was using steroids or human growth hormone. According to Radomski, however, McNamee asked Radomski what types of substances Radomski was providing to pitchers.

Radomski delivered the substances to McNamee personally. Radomski recalled numerous performance enhancing substance transactions with McNamee. Radomski also sometimes trained some of McNamee’s non-professional athlete clients.

Radomski produced four checks from McNamee that were deposited into
Radomski’s checking account and drawn on McNamee’s checking account. All the checks were dated in 2003 and 2004, after McNamee said that he supplied Clemens, Pettitte, and Knoblauch. McNamee said these purchases were for non-baseball clients.

McNamee’s name, with an address and telephone number, is listed in the address book seized from Radomski’s residence by federal agents. Radomski’s telephone records show twelve calls to McNamee’s telephone number from May through August 2004. Radomski was unable to obtain telephone records dating back to the time when, according to McNamee,
McNamee was injecting Clemens.

Clemens appears to be one of the two people associated with baseball – Andy Pettitte is the other – who have remained loyal to McNamee after he left the Yankees. Clemens has remained a source of income for McNamee up to and including 2007.

Prior to my interviews of McNamee he was interviewed by federal officials on several occasions, during each of which they informed McNamee that he risked criminal prosecution if he was not truthful. I was advised by those officials that on each occasion he told them about the performance enhancing substance use of Clemens, Andy Pettitte, and Chuck
Knoblauch (Pettitte and Knoblauch are discussed below).

In order to provide Clemens with information about these allegations and to give him an opportunity to respond, I asked him to meet with me; he declined.

UNHWildCats
December 15th, 2007, 12:52 PM
interesting though that in Clemens statement released by his agent the words "I never did steroids" were never mentioned..... :p

JoltinJoe
December 15th, 2007, 01:01 PM
From today's Newsday:

While Clemens has been publicly pulverized since the release of the Mitchell Report, it should be stressed that Mitchell presented only one witness, McNamee, who accused Clemens of wrongdoing. There is no corroborating witness, and, unlike many of the other players named, no paper trail.

Clemens could return in '08 despite accusations (http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/ny-sproger1215,0,3405607.story)

Actually, as I'm reading today, the observation above seems to be a trend. Perhaps as more journalists have actually read the report itself, and spoken to legal analysts, we are seeing more reasoned and sober appraisals of Mitchell's work product. Here's another:

The 409-page document raises a number of questions. But the most important question is this: How reliable are the sources Mitchell used.

It appears much of the report is based on the testimony of two people — a clubhouse flunky and a physical trainer, both of whom seem to have axes to grind or behinds to protect.

That doesn’t necessarily mean their testimonies are wrong. But you have to wonder if those same testimonies would stand up under cross examination in court.

What did we learn from steroids report? (http://www.enidnews.com/sportslocal/local_story_348234040.html)

Gil Dobie
December 15th, 2007, 01:31 PM
Even though Clemens accusations may or may not stand up in legal circles, the court of public opinion now and will always have Clemens labeled as a cheater. Unless Clemens takes this witness to court and proves it was a lie, the opinion probably will not change. My hobby business will be directly affected by this report. I will not purchase any memorabilia of any player on the list, because it has been cheapened by the players attempt to cheat.

*Roger Clemens, set records during the Bud Selig Steroid Era. xthumbsupx

JohnStOnge
December 16th, 2007, 09:34 AM
Hadn't said anything to this point and I others have already basically said this but:

He may not be different in reality. We don't know. His case IS different at this point, though, in terms of the extent of evidence and level of certainty associated with the allegation.

Sure wouldn't be surprised if he's "no different" in reality.

I heard a couple of former LSU baseball players who played in the big leagues talking about it on the radio the other day. I think one of them was Kurt Ainsworth. They said the overwhelming majority of big leaguers have used performance enhancing drugs and that naming 80 is a joke.

Ainsworth (I think) was very bitter. He said he did not do it...one reason being that he was worried about having kids. He said he was pressured to use them so he could recover from injury. Also said others "jumped" him because they used them. You could tell this guy was really genuinely, passionately upset about feeling pressured by competition to use something he didn't want to use and also because of believing his career wasn't as good as it could have been because others used it as an advantage while he would not. Felt he was forced to make the choice between damaging his body and millions of dollars and was very angry about it.

HIU 93
December 16th, 2007, 10:16 AM
They were mentioned, but not accused like most of the others.

I think McGwire should get a pass. He never failed a drug test, the only thing we know he took was Andro, a legal supplement at the time, and even if he was juicing, steroids weren't illegal in baseball at the time.

And as the report shows, a lot of pitchers he was facing were juicing.

If that is the case- Bonds never failed a test either.

JayJ79
December 16th, 2007, 10:19 AM
Who's to say that some of the "old time" players didn't use some sort of performance enhancing substances?
Granted, there wasn't quite the advanced pharmaceuticals and technology in such things. But it was still there. And there wasn't ANY testing for it back then.

Cleets
December 16th, 2007, 10:27 AM
I have now officially changed my position. With the release of this report, I fully believe this list only scratches the surface and Jose Canseco was right (JESUS, it's hard to say that.) There were, in all likelihood, hundreds of players using the juice, and HGH. With that being said, although I've been an ardent supporter of Bonds NOT getting into the hall. I now firmly believe all the "hall-worthy" numbers should get into the hall, in a wing entitled "The Steroids Era". At least that way, they're held in the context in which their numbers were "earned".

I say, let 'em all in....Bonds, McGuire, Clemens, and anybody else who has hall worthy numbers in the era from 1990-2007. The real question is: In this drug-induced numbers era, WHAT makes a player hall-worthy? Since there were both pitchers and hitters on the sauce, does it ultimately even out the playing field (figuratively speaking of course)?

Who knows....if I were a bettin' man, I'd say those who have the numbers get in, just not on the first ballot, and certainly not unanimously (as I'm sure Bonds would have been had he not been embroiled in this...)

xcoffeex


POST OF THE WEEK...!!! xbowx

mrklean
December 16th, 2007, 10:33 AM
This shows how far baseball as sunk as the American past time!! In the 70's baseball was KING. Now is a sad joke. Iam glad my grandfather was not alive to see his beloved game!

dbackjon
December 16th, 2007, 02:10 PM
With Pettitte admitting to cheating using Clemen's dealer/injector, Clemens denials ring very hollow.

Cleets
December 16th, 2007, 02:20 PM
With Pettitte admitting to cheating using Clemen's dealer/injector, Clemens denials ring very hollow.

Agreed...!!!

Gil Dobie
December 16th, 2007, 08:22 PM
Who's to say that some of the "old time" players didn't use some sort of performance enhancing substances?
Granted, there wasn't quite the advanced pharmaceuticals and technology in such things. But it was still there. And there wasn't ANY testing for it back then.

Many of them played with hangovers, smoked cigarettes and worked at car dealerships and bowling alleys etc during the off season just to survive. How could they afford performance enhancing drugs in the first place? Big money didn't come into sport until the 1970's. Prior to that, only a few superstars would get a lot of money.

foghorn
December 16th, 2007, 10:38 PM
This shows how far baseball as sunk as the American past time!! In the 70's baseball was KING. Now is a sad joke. Iam glad my grandfather was not alive to see his beloved game!

Baseball is more popular now than ever. Eight teams broke their all-time attendance records this year!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_Baseball_attendance_records

More proof. http://sportsbusinessnews.com/_news/news_351399.php

Gil Dobie
December 17th, 2007, 09:24 AM
Baseball is more popular now than ever. Eight teams broke their all-time attendance records this year!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_Baseball_attendance_records

More proof. http://sportsbusinessnews.com/_news/news_351399.php

The Minnesota Twins are downsizing with their new outdoor stadium. :(

AZGrizFan
December 17th, 2007, 09:44 AM
If that is the case- Bonds never failed a test either.

Exactly. And that's why I've changed my stance completely on their entrance into the hall. xcoolx

Marcus Garvey
December 17th, 2007, 10:57 AM
Baseball is more popular now than ever. Eight teams broke their all-time attendance records this year!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_Baseball_attendance_records

More proof. http://sportsbusinessnews.com/_news/news_351399.php

Aye! And that's the conundrum. Baseball is setting records for attendance, yet TV ratings continue to fall and fewer kids are playing youth baseball. xconfusedx xconfusedx xconfusedx

I know this is hard to believe, but there was a time the World Series got MNF type ratings. Now, they lose to Survivor.

But rest assured, I have a plan to save baseball. I shall enact it upon my coronation as "Emperor." Oh, and I believe in absolute monarchism too, so my plan won't be hard to enact! xthumbsupx

mlbowl
December 17th, 2007, 11:04 AM
If that is the case- Bonds never failed a test either.


Really...xconfusedx xconfusedx xconfusedx

http://sanfrancisco.giants.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070111&content_id=1777148&vkey=news_sf&fext=.jsp&c_id=sf

foghorn
December 17th, 2007, 11:56 AM
Aye! And that's the conundrum. Baseball is setting records for attendance, yet TV ratings continue to fall and fewer kids are playing youth baseball. xconfusedx xconfusedx xconfusedx

I know this is hard to believe, but there was a time the World Series got MNF type ratings. Now, they lose to Survivor.

But rest assured, I have a plan to save baseball. I shall enact it upon my coronation as "Emperor." Oh, and I believe in absolute monarchism too, so my plan won't be hard to enact! xthumbsupx

The real viewer loser is the NBA. Viewership down 19% during first Finals game. http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/sports/articles/0609nbanb0609.html .

Monday night football doesn't flourish as it once did either. I think the reasons are people are using other means to entertain themselves; i.e., the internet, Playstation, and 'live' entertainment such as actually attending games. For instance, the Phillies' games are attracting a young adult crowd to the point where the game becomes a social event as well as a sports entertainment event.
The Yankees drew over 4 million in an old decrepit stadium. Wait 'til the 'new' stadium opens. Season tickets will go through the roof!

HIU 93
December 17th, 2007, 12:30 PM
Really...xconfusedx xconfusedx xconfusedx

http://sanfrancisco.giants.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070111&content_id=1777148&vkey=news_sf&fext=.jsp&c_id=sf

Amphetamines aren't steroids. Some of y'all must have failed chemistry!xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx

BlueHen86
December 17th, 2007, 12:38 PM
They were mentioned, but not accused like most of the others.

I think McGwire should get a pass. He never failed a drug test, the only thing we know he took was Andro, a legal supplement at the time, and even if he was juicing, steroids weren't illegal in baseball at the time.

And as the report shows, a lot of pitchers he was facing were juicing.


If that is the case- Bonds never failed a test either.


Really...xconfusedx xconfusedx xconfusedx

http://sanfrancisco.giants.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070111&content_id=1777148&vkey=news_sf&fext=.jsp&c_id=sf


Amphetamines aren't steroids. Some of y'all must have failed chemistry!xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx


The original post specifically said "drug test", no mention of steroids.
I guess some of y'all must have failed english!xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx

Marcus Garvey
December 17th, 2007, 12:41 PM
Amphetamines aren't steroids. Some of y'all must have failed chemistry!xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx

But you can lump amphetimines with "performance enhancing" because players took them to improve their reactions. I don't know how effective that really was, but the intent of the players taking them was to "enhance" their performance.

mlbowl
December 17th, 2007, 01:02 PM
Amphetamines aren't steroids. Some of y'all must have failed chemistry!xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx

However, Amphetamines were a banned substance when Bonds reportedly failed the test.

mlbowl
December 17th, 2007, 01:04 PM
But you can lump amphetimines with "performance enhancing" because players took them to improve their reactions. I don't know how effective that really was, but the intent of the players taking them was to "enhance" their performance.


...and they are most definitely a "banned substance"