The Loss Column — Baltimore Sports Blog and Community

The smoking gun in the Barry Bonds saga might have finally been unearthed: the Feds are claiming that he failed a steroid test in 2000.

I was as> ready as everyone else to put this nonsense to rest, but evidence of a failed test completely changes the game. Barry Bonds is a stain on baseball, pure and simple. I really can’t see any credible argument to the contrary.

I’ve had a bit of time now to look over news of the Mitchell Report (I haven’t read it yet…pretty sure I won’t get to that any time soon). A few thoughts:

First, I’m glad this thing is finally out. It’s about damn time.

Second, I’m not surprised by any of it. I think we all more or less knew that Roger Clemens was juicing. Andy Pettite is a bit of an eyebrow-raiser, but it’s not that crazy.

As far as the Orioles, we knew Tejada would probably be in there, and the same goes for Larry Bigbie and — unfortunately — Brian Roberts. I couldn’t really care less about the other O’s named. It’s not like I ever really considered guys like Tim Laker and Todd Williams important members of the team.

There is a story here and that is the report itself and the names contained therein. But there is another story that lurks beneath the surface, and that is the issue of steroids themselves and what effect they have had on the game. For every Clemens or Bonds we find there are countless more like Nook Logan and Cody McKay and Ricky Stone.

Clearly the juice had little to no effect on what these guys were able to accomplish.

So if you happen to be one of these “who cares, steroids don’t make you a better ballplayer” types then you, unfortunately, have a leg to stand on here. Most of the big names who juiced were better-than-average performers to begin with. There are going to be people who seize on this to make a “steroids are no big deal argument.” Those people are still wrong, but the issue just got a lot more complex.

All that really matters is what baseball does going forward. If they implement the recommendations and we finally move to a point where the game is as clean as it can reasonably be then, hey, call it a win. The sooner we can close the book on this game of Steroids Gotcha, the better.

So…Erik Bedard to the Reds?

One of my many non-sports pursuits involves co-teaching a class in Narrative Illustration at MICA. That happens every few Thursdays, and tomorrow is one such Thursday.

George Mitchell has no regard for my schedule. He has decided to release his steroid report at the same time that I’ll be waist-deep in helping evaluate final projects, rendering me helpless in the face of what figures to be some serious breaking news. Indeed, rumors are are already running rampant.

Given that disadvantage, I’m opening up the floor from now until tomorrow evening/night for anything and everything related to the report. I fully expect an Oriole or two to be named, making this a big Baltimore story. So take the comments section of this post and run with it. I’d like for this to be the absolute best place for Baltimore fans to turn for quality discussion, and I have no doubt you all will make it that and then some.

I just hope the news isn’t too bad. For us, that is. I won’t shed a single tear if Derek Jeter’s name turns up. Nope.

Quick and dirty, for your consideration: Barry Bonds has (finally) been indicted on perjury and obstruction of justice charges.

As I’m sure everyone knows, an indictment doesn’t necessarily indicate any actual guilt. But in Bonds’ case…well, come on.

Thoughts?

From the “you might have missed this, I almost did” department:

Fashion designer Marc Ecko took to the tubes at ESPN.com today for a live chat about his handling of Barry Bonds‘ tainted ball. As it turns out, Ecko is an interesting, thoughtful, and seemingly intelligent man who did not enter into this lightly or on a whim. He appears quite genuine in his quest to use this as a way to further the debate and dialogue about ethics and integrity in sports.

The full transcript is behind ESPN’s “Insider” firewall (nice job, dopes), so if you’re not a member of that service you won’t be able to read it. How-evah, I’ve excerpted two of the best passages for you because I think they deserve to be seen.

Chris (Boston): Out of the three choices you proposed, which one would you choose?

Marc Ecko: I voted, before people knew the site was live, for the asterisk. The reason is that it’s a lot bigger than 756. It has to do with the last 10 years in sports. It’s a system that fosters its athletes to cheat. I want to be able to look at my heros and look at them as heros for a reason and doing it on their own. My ability to imagine doing these things and the very notion that it might not be what it actually is, is bad for the sport. You don’t need that in the living room, when you’re watching the game. You don’t need to be having that discussion.

Then a few questions later…

Chris Starr San Francisco, CA: I understand you’re not a Barry Bonds fan and that’s fine, but wouldn’t the $752,467 have been spent as a donation to charity? Isn’t that a lot of money to waste on a baseball you have no intention of keeping?

Marc Ecko: Actually, as a private citizen who spends millions and millions on charity as it is and earns his money by working really hard, I think the way I spent the money is a good thing. This won’t get swept under the rug. As a social issue, this is real. In terms of speaking about our values and pro sports. I think it’s been good to get that debate out there. After 10 million votes, it’s about seven cents a vote. I wanted to do this, I wanted to mix it up. I earned it. That’s what life should be about. Good question. Fair question.

He also talks about the Hall of Fame and how they’re working with him to display the ball and tell the whole story behind it (assuming it doesn’t end up in space).

This is just about the best thing that could have happened to the ball. Maybe some good will ultimately come of it.

A few noteworthy items have built up over the past couple of days, so here you go:

– No NFL Inquest this week because, well, I didn’t get around to it and now it’s Thursday. I promise to bring back the keen insights and trenchant analysis next week and for (nearly) every football week thereafter.

– Get it while it’s hot: a full rundown of next year’s MLB uniform changes. There’s some really interesting stuff in there, including a new (and very weak) identity for the “Tampa Bay Rays” (above) and some wicked cool alternates for the Indians and the Blue Jays.

No changes for the O’s, but you knew that.

via Uni Watch

– Speaking of new identities, the details of Dale Earnhardt Jr.’s new sponsors/number have been made official.

I’m actually fascinated by auto racing paint schemes and numbering systems, so feel free to nerd out with me on this.

– Finally, don’t forget to cast your vote on what happens to Barry Bonds‘ record-tainting home run ball. Marc Ecko deserves major props for this little stunt. I can’t imagine a cooler way to handle it, an opinion that’s backed up by this article. Anything that annoys Bonds can’t be all bad.

For the record, I cast my vote in favor of branding the ball with an asterisk. Man I hope that one wins.

At first glance, the NFL’s announcement today that they’re punishing Bill Belichick and the Patriots for cheating seems like a strong move. Belichick himself is out $500k, the Pats as a team are out $250k and some high draft picks. It’ll almost certainly make them, and every other team, think twice before engaging in any further chicanery.

But is it enough?

Not when you look at the other cheating-related news that broke today.

$750k and a couple of picks is child’s play compared to one-hundred million dollars and a door left open to penalties next season.

The moral? The World Motor Sports Council takes cheating seriously, while the NFL would kind of sort of prefer that you not do it.

I’ve got an NFL Inquest coming later today, but in the meantime I wanted to make everyone aware of a very interesting comment left last night on the Gibbons post:

read it here.

I can’t vouch for any of this, and I’d encourage everyone to take it with a grain of salt, but…

…it certainly passes the plausibility test.