Monday, December 17, 2007
Major League Baseball
I was out of town when the Mitchell report studying steroids in MLB came out. My first reaction was "Duh". If your sport is so corrupt, so willing to look the other way when they KNOW something is amiss, what do you expect a decent investigation to turn up? Where there's THAT much smoke, there's a raging fire and this was a skyscraper afire from basement to penthouse.
What surprised me less than the "discoveries" of juiced players is the reaction that players were somehow treated unfairly. However damning Mitchell's report is, it's hardly investigative journalism at its best or even surprising. If MLB were really interested in finding out how pervasive drugs are in the locker room, it could easily institute a drug testing policy and see. The player's union would howl, but at the end of the day, it's fair for the commish and owners to say "look, every whisper about how we're a bunch of juiced up 'roid ragers damages the product we're selling. If you'd rather skulk away, there are probably retirement options in your contract, but we're cleaning up this game and we're doing it now. You can be a part of that or you can find another job."
Would it be uncomfortable for a while? Maybe. Would it restore the faith of every fan or near fan? No. But would it be the best thing for the game, long-term? Depends. If MLB wants to sell a product the fans can believe in, then the answer is yes. If they want to they can say "Folks, we're all about home runs, record and stats here. If it takes players drinking HGH smoothies for breakfast, lunch and dinner with a double shot of any other drug they think will help at happy hour, so be it. What we want to be clear on is that MLB will administer the drugs, so you can feel safe." I won't watch either way. Baseball had its chance with me.
What surprised me less than the "discoveries" of juiced players is the reaction that players were somehow treated unfairly. However damning Mitchell's report is, it's hardly investigative journalism at its best or even surprising. If MLB were really interested in finding out how pervasive drugs are in the locker room, it could easily institute a drug testing policy and see. The player's union would howl, but at the end of the day, it's fair for the commish and owners to say "look, every whisper about how we're a bunch of juiced up 'roid ragers damages the product we're selling. If you'd rather skulk away, there are probably retirement options in your contract, but we're cleaning up this game and we're doing it now. You can be a part of that or you can find another job."
Would it be uncomfortable for a while? Maybe. Would it restore the faith of every fan or near fan? No. But would it be the best thing for the game, long-term? Depends. If MLB wants to sell a product the fans can believe in, then the answer is yes. If they want to they can say "Folks, we're all about home runs, record and stats here. If it takes players drinking HGH smoothies for breakfast, lunch and dinner with a double shot of any other drug they think will help at happy hour, so be it. What we want to be clear on is that MLB will administer the drugs, so you can feel safe." I won't watch either way. Baseball had its chance with me.
