Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Espn 30 for 30 on Lance Armstrong and the 98 HR derby season

Collapse

Google Ads

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Espn 30 for 30 on Lance Armstrong and the 98 HR derby season

    What’s the point of these unless they all admit they were cheating assholes?

    Does the world need hours of Lance, McGwire and Sosa trying to explain away their cheating? I’ll only be curious to see what color Sosa is.

  • #2
    First, for the eleventy billionth time, there was ZERO cheating with the 1998 home run race. Supplmentation was not banned until much after...When idiots with zero knowledge of health supplements started running their mouths. They did not break the rules, as they were written. We will never know what they took, and they don't "owe" anyone jack or shit. McGwire and Sosa saved baseball...In b4 mini appears out of thin air to say Cal Ripken matters...1998 brought baseball back to the front lines of all sports coverage.


    Second...Blood doping has been proven to be rampant in cycling. Was Lance a liar in many ways? Fuck yes. Did he raise hundreds and hundreds of millions for cancer research and empower thousands of dying people? Fuck yes, as well.

    Comment


    • #3
      I don’t owe you Jack shit would have been a better response than “I’m not here to talk about the past” and forgetting how to speak English.

      Comment


      • #4
        Cycling was more entertaining when everyone was doping.

        Comment


        • #5
          I think they were spamming these 30/30 ads during the MJ documentary and like 3/4 of them were for cheaters.

          I'm with Fresneck though in terms of the moral relativism. Lance doping in a sport where like 98% of people dope and being an ass about it..but the guy also was an inspiration and raised millions of dollars to fight cancer.

          Sosa/McGuire also both did a lot of lying and both are rumored to have taken banned substances(per the 1991 ban), but it was also highly entertaining.

          Comment


          • #6
            The one they do in 20 years about Dabo Swinney's child sex ring will be a must-watch

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Gyle View Post
              The one they do in 20 years about Dabo Swinney's child sex ring will be a must-watch
              It will be called Tiger King II. Dabo uses tiger cubs to lure children into his sex ring -- and in a strange twist, he will be outed by that bitch Carole Baskin, who fed her ex-husband to tigers.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Gyle View Post
                The one they do in 20 years about Dabo Swinney's child sex ring will be a must-watch
                Rub that rock, bitches!!

                Comment


                • #9
                  I never understood why people take a moral stance against juicing, anyway. Seems pretty selective to me.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by tOSUfanboi2 View Post
                    I never understood why people take a moral stance against juicing, anyway. Seems pretty selective to me.
                    I don't know, you might ask the people that those athletes took jobs from. They might have some better insight.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by FuqMizzou View Post

                      I don't know, you might ask the people that those athletes took jobs from. They might have some better insight.
                      This operates under a lot of assumptions, namely that:

                      A.) That wouldn’t have happened anyway.
                      B.) That inborn genetic superiority is somehow more fair than artificially induced superiority (pro tip: it’s not)
                      C.) That the same options weren’t available to them
                      and D.) That if they were and those people refused for one reason or another, that they shouldn’t pay the same price for that as they would if they refused to make any number of other sacrifices.
                      Last edited by tOSUfanboi2; 05-20-2020, 09:38 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        The only issue I have with the anti-dopers is the never HOF stance. Especially in the case of Barry Bonds. If he retires instead of going to San Francisco, he's in the HOF today. Why does his "allegedly" taking PEDs make it like he wasn't talented enough to be there.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by DSMoneypit View Post
                          The only issue I have with the anti-dopers is the never HOF stance. Especially in the case of Barry Bonds. If he retires instead of going to San Francisco, he's in the HOF today. Why does his "allegedly" taking PEDs make it like he wasn't talented enough to be there.
                          First, PED is a stupid term Disney used to change the narrative. It was supplements, and then performance enhancing supplements, and then DRUGSAREBADMMKAY became the narrative. And, "doping" is another painfully inaccurate term used everywhere. Blood doping and supplement are separate things. Could they be used together? Sure. But, calling supplementation "doping" is dopey as fuck. Protein powder is a supplement, as are energy drinks. Are they considered doping or a drug?

                          Second, we don't know what anyone was taking for any amount of time. The guys that fessed up to legit steroid use - Ken Camminiti (sp?) and Jose Canseco - deserve to be in the Hall, especially Canseco. He broke open the whole story...Most guys were taking simple shit you could buy at GNC. That's how the McGwire story actually fuckin' started and why it pisses me off 20+ years later. That same fuckin' bottle someone asked him about in his locker was available for anyone over 18 at GNC or any other "vitamin" store. But, let's call that nefarious and label him a drug user. Words matter.

                          Third, the advantage in hand-eye coordination under the influence of amphetamines is far greater than using supplements to get bigger and stronger, yet amphetamines were part of all pro sports for decades.

                          Everyone playing within the rules at their time should be judged on their on-field performances and their actions with the community....Like the voters do with people they choose as "clean"....No one is gonna' tell me Jr didn't supplement. At my biggest, I stood next to him and he was swole as fuck during his Reds days. I had 19"+ arms (still bummed I never broke 20", but that's an entirely different topic), and his were every bit as big as mine...That's not gonna' happen from chicken breasts and broccoli considering what he looked like at 19 when he came in the league.
                          Walter Payton died of liver problems commonly associated with substance and steroid abuse...His name is NEVER mentioned.
                          Those are just two all-time greats I would bet my life supplemented heavily - especially Payton, considering his timeframe and death.

                          I forgot where I was going with all that...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by tOSUfanboi2 View Post

                            This operates under a lot of assumptions, namely that:

                            A.) That wouldn’t have happened anyway.
                            B.) That inborn genetic superiority is somehow more fair than artificially induced superiority (pro tip: it’s not)
                            C.) That the same options weren’t available to them
                            and D.) That if they were and those people refused for one reason or another, that they shouldn’t pay the same price for that as they would if they refused to make any number of other sacrifices.
                            I'm not talking about specifically McGuire and Sosa, those guys were going to play anyway. I'm sure there are tons of guys who were on the cusp of making it who decided to roid up and knocked another guy out.

                            Is it ok if a guy lies on his resume and gets a job instead of you? You had the same options available.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by FuqMizzou View Post

                              I'm not talking about specifically McGuire and Sosa, those guys were going to play anyway. I'm sure there are tons of guys who were on the cusp of making it who decided to roid up and knocked another guy out.

                              Is it ok if a guy lies on his resume and gets a job instead of you? You had the same options available.
                              It’s legal to do, so there’s nothing stopping him. Would I do it? No, but that’s a moral choice I make as an individual and I accept that there’s going to be consequences to that. I wouldn’t take steroids either, to me the risks outweigh the benefits given the general quality (or lack thereof) of a lot of the shit that’s out there, but I’m also not an athlete. Now if I was an NFL linebacker and sticking that needle in my ass was the difference between $30 million and being unemployed? I might not see it the same way.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X