More than half of the guys that did dont even play baseball anymore and are retired. And what are you going to do to a player that DID take performance-enhancing substances. Back in the late 80's and early 90's, many players took steriods, probably most of the league. Now all of a sudden the cat comes out of the bag? Something doesn't sound right here.
yngprofmn
Favorite Answer
Of course it does make a difference. Their achievements and careers are forever linked to the Mitchell report.
They cheated to get to where they are/went and young people around the world should be quite disillusioned because the heroes they looked up to are dishonest.
They've shown that the only way to get ahead is to cheat and thats the wrong message to send to people, especially young people.
I will never watch baseball again.
Stewie Griffin
No, all it shows is Mitchell reporting on a couple ofthe more visible suppliers to MLB players. I outlined how any reasonable player making $300K+ a year can easily avoid public embarrassment and the testing done.
Anonymous
not really it just puts a taint on baseball as a whole. everyone wants baseball to be as pure and fun as it was in like the 20's thinks have changed alot since then. the pressure of success gets the best of everyone. micky mantle was a bad acholic. roger maris the guys hair starting falling out cause of his home run chase. different people cope different ways the steroids is a way to fight back in stead of falling back
Angela J
to me Clemens will always be a # 1 pitcher with or without the inhancements. Hall of fame voting wise might hurt him--it seems like in baseball everyone is guilty first without a trial.