• Welcome to the PopMalt Forums! Whether you're new to forums or a veteran, welcome to our humble home on the web! We're a 20-year old forum community with thousands of discussions on entertainment, lifestyle, leisure, and more.

    Our rules are simple. Be nice and don't spam. Registration is free, so what are you waiting for? Join today!.

Babe Ruth

SHOELESSJOE3

Registered Member
For what it's worth, the editor ( or now ex editor ) of canseco's book believes canseco has nothing on arod.
I did believe much of what Jose said in his first book and like him or not it was proven much of what he said did take place. With that said I am doubting his words on AROD, let him prove it in the book.
 

Sultan_1895-1948

Registered Member
For what it's worth, the editor ( or now ex editor ) of canseco's book believes canseco has nothing on arod.
Does he have a video of it or did he see it first hand. Not likely. However, when someone with Canseco's knowledge and connections says that he's surprised Arod's name wasn't in the Mitchell report, it has to give you a moment of pause. That's all.
 

mopeg

Registered Member
Does he have a video of it or did he see it first hand. Not likely. However, when someone with Canseco's knowledge and connections says that he's surprised Arod's name wasn't in the Mitchell report, it has to give you a moment of pause. That's all.
I understand your point. If Arod is indeed a juicer, how will that make baseball look? Nearly every single fan believes Bonds and Clemens cheated, how would it look if one of it's other most accomplished players is found to have juiced?

For Arod and baseball's sake, I hope it isn't true. But who knows.
 

Sultan_1895-1948

Registered Member
I understand your point. If Arod is indeed a juicer, how will that make baseball look? Nearly every single fan believes Bonds and Clemens cheated, how would it look if one of it's other most accomplished players is found to have juiced?

For Arod and baseball's sake, I hope it isn't true. But who knows.
We can hope all we want, but at this point, nobody would surprise me. Given that not everyone who is on something beefs up like Bonds did, we would be silly to dismiss a guy just because he is small. At the same time, we would be just as silly to visually indict a guy like Arod just because he's gotten bigger. Who knows. All I know, is that no matter if Arod is clean or dirty, his numbers still need to be put into proper perspective, historically speaking. This era is a joke even sans PEDs.
 
Top