Letters to the Editor
-
The obvious point
I suppose the obvious point to be made (hey, somebody's gotta do it) is that big leaguers who turn to hangers-on for advice have already decided what they don't want to know: namely, the legit, legal, medical advice. They want the miracle, the "I'll do anything it takes," the insider's special-treatment, I've got a doctor in Mexico version.
Guys like McAfee prosper not so much because big leaguers are stupid, but because they are so desperate for what they perceive to be the edge that they are corrupted by it. He doesn't really have to pass that high of a bar, because they are already to come over to his side.
-
The McNamee Precedent
It isn't Barry Bonds' trainer, it's Pete Rose's hangers-on. All those errand boys and sycophants and ass-kissers, united by their willingness to do Rose's bidding, take care of his needs and polish his apples. They were all, as Rose's defenders said for years, a bunch of liars, cheaters and lawbreakers.
They had one other thing in common: about Rose, they told the truth.
Between Clemens and McNamee, the real difference is that essentially none of Clemens' story has held up: injecting Lidocaine, injecting B-12, never discussing HGH with Pettitte, you name it. While McNamee's story has been bolstered in unexpected ways. The Congressmen aren't exactly Perry Mason (but they play him on TV), but based on one day's testimony, I'd say it's advantage McNamee.
-
The McNamees will Always Have a Job in Pro Sports
I watched Clemens testify before Congress and thought to myself, "He's going for the stupid defense." Yes, Clemens was such a simple and trusting characer that he could be taken advantage by a none-too-bright-bulb like McNamee?! Does anyone really believe this?
McNamee was a trusted and (un)faithful friend to Clemens because he served a very clear and important purpose: to prolong his career in ways nature and legitimate medical science never could. It rankles me that some on the congressional panel were blistering McNamee so badly. There must be many, many more characters like him throughout most pro sports. Where there's ridiculous amounts of money to be made, there will most likely be many people who will do almost anything to retain it and hold on to it. That's the bottom line.
-
The lowlifes have the goods
Sometimes you need a lowlife to provide what the more legitimate supplier will not. A "real" PhD might have told Clemens to take some time off to rest. A "real" PhD might have told Pettitte to consider the same after his surgery. Then again, you could probably find a less scrupulous person with a real PhD who would have provided the same services as McNamee. The players wanted HGH and steroids and they found the only people who would provide them.
The problem here is that we are too focused on one lowlife and we treat him as the abberation. McNamee should not be singled out as much as he has been. He should be looked at as one of many. The failure of the last few months has been the narrowing down of a rampant problem in baseball (and all sports) to a list of 80 in the Mitchell report and finally to a he said/he said confrontation between two people. We know that there were McNamees and Clemens', not just in the Yankees clubhouse but in the clubhouses of the Mets (Radomski, etc.), Giants (Bonds, BALCO, etc.), Cardinals (McGwire) and Orioles (Palmiero, Sosa). There is no reason to believe that there wasn't a McNamee in every clubhouse in baseball. And as long as we continue to focus on Clemens and McNamee we can be sure this broad-based problem will remain.
-
Fast talking ex-cops
"But putting his trust in a fast-talking ex-cop seems to be par for the course for our heroes."
At least Clemens never tried to appoint McNamee as the Secretary of Homeland Security...
-
Re: Barfield
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/33402
-
Board Certified Trainers
probably won't stick you with roids or HGH.
Ask Jesse if that kid from from Seattle can play outfield defense. (He's right though. There isn't that much pride in corner outfield play anymore.)
Didn't Jesse's son push him down the stairs? That was a pretty sad story.
So many questions about this article. What happened there at the end? Rent a Chevy Malibu, King. A red one, put the top down. Get some wind in those sideburns.
-
Bunts vs. home runs
King Kaufman: I'm continually impressed by your insights into the sports world and the individuals who populate it. Reading your columns is an education that you can't get from reading the sports section of the newspaper.
I lament the coarsening of baseball in recent years. The abuse of steroids and HGH is a natural concomitant of the emphasis on home runs. People like Barry Bonds and Sammy Sosa made themselves artificially big with steroids and God-knows-what-else so they could hit more home runs and keep the fans happy.
But the home run has never been the essence of baseball, or even its most exciting feature. Nothing can compare with a well-executed bunt that attempts to move one or more baserunners over, or just a bunt in order to get on base. It calls for timing, skill and daring by the team at bat and the team in the field. Home runs, by comparison, are a matter of muscle and brute force. (Okay, there's timing and skill involved, too.)
-
Barfield
King - I loved your thoughts on Barfield. I'm getting old, too (though not as old as you) I remember very clearly that awesome Jays triumverate of Bell, Barfield, and Moseby(sp?). Well not that clearly.
-
I think this was best explained by that great sportswriter, Richard Hofstadter.
"Anti-Intellectualism in American Life."
The all-too-common American tendency to be suspicious of smart people is perhaps even more pronounced in sports locker rooms. That leads naturally to athletes instinctively shying away from folks with book learnin' - doctors, for example - and turning instead to the "regular Joe' when a few tips on physical therapy are needed.
-
Why should athletes be different from any other celebrities?
Check out the "entourages" of many movie stars and pop singers. Don't they abound with "alternative" medicine "experts," practitioners of cult religions (like the recently departed Maharishi), "life coaches," etc.? Mistrust of "mainstream" expertise seems to be part and parcel of celebrity culture nowadays, regardless of the specific profession of the famous person.
And let's not get started about Nancy Reagan's "(White)House Astrologer."
So no, I'm not especiallly surprised.