Face Off

Christopher Hopkins

"Ruth did it on hot dogs and beer. Aaron did it with class. How did you do it?"

Phillies fans said it best when Barry Bonds made his first trip to Citizens Bank Park after the whole news of the BALCO case made news. Bonds, the poster child for steroids and the Dark Age in baseball that is slowly coming to an end, has recently been convicted of obstruction of justice for "knowingly giving material testimony that was intentionally evasive, false or misleading" from his 2003 trial with Congress about steroid use.

Bonds is certainly not the only one to take part in the Steroid Era of baseball. Jose Canseco estimated that 80 to 90 percent of major league players were using or have used steroids. Most recently, we saw one of the greatest right-handed hitters of all-time in Manny Ramirez test positive for an illegal substance for the second time in two years. Ramirez has put up immortal numbers throughout his career, hitting .312 with a .411 on base percentage, and a .585 slugging percentage. Not to mention his 555 home runs and 1,831 RBIs, which places him 14th and 18th all-time respectively.

As great as these numbers look, they are not too unusual with players from the past decade. Steroids made good players great and great players the best the game has seen. Some of the best players of my childhood, Bonds, Ramirez, Sammy Sosa, Roger Clemens, Mark McGwire, and Jason Giambi to name a few, have been associated with steroids and has cast a giant shadow over this great game.

Just by looking at these stellar career numbers of these great players, it would seem ridiculous to not consider them for the Hall of Fame, where the greatest of all-time are put together to recognize their excellence. These players' numbers put them right at the top of some of the greatest to ever play. However, with the help of performance enhancing drugs and human growth hormones, these players not only deserve to be left out of Cooperstown, but should be kicked out of the game all together.

To include these players in the Hall of Fame would just be an insult to the integrity and purism that baseball has been so strongly built on. Players like Babe Ruth, Willie Mays, and Ted Williams played the game that it was supposed to be played. They had no outside substances aiding their game and padding their stats. These players who felt that they could take a shortcut and cheat the game don't deserve to be honored the same way that these legends do.

The way the drug testing is currently set up, players are suspended 50 games for their first time failing, 100 games for a second fail, and are banned for life on a third strike. This policy is way too lenient on the players. Ramirez is the first and only big name player to fail twice, and just retired instead of facing the consequences. If you don't respect the game enough to continue to take PEDs after failing once, you deserve a permanent ban. What Pete Rose did betting on baseball warrants a lot less than second drug test failure, and he was banned on his first violation.

 So as all the Steroid Era players grow older and retire and begin to be put on the Hall of Fame ballot, there is no question that these players have no place in Cooperstown. I just hope the voters keep the integrity of the game alive and keep the true legends separate from today's wannabes.

Phat Nguyen

With the recent news of Manny Ramirez failing another drug test, the debate of whether or not players tied to performance enhancing drugs deserve Hall of Fame recognition has become popular yet again.

The mindset of most voters is they will not vote for any player tied to performance enhancing drugs. One of the most  respected voters includes ESPN baseball analyst Buster Olney, who has been more understanding on the subject and has voted for guys like Mark McGwire, and  he will also vote Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and Alex Rodriguez when they become eligible.

Olney goes on to explain that the only fair thing to do would be to vote for no one that played during the steroid era, or vote for the best players regardless of ties to steroids or other performance-enhancing drugs since Major League Baseball looked the other way.

The guidelines for HOF voting clearly state that voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character and contributions to the team on which the player played.

So should we side with the majority of HOF voters and exclude those tied to admitted drug use? Or should we pardon players to be allowed into baseball's most prestigious club after understanding the circumstances?

I think everyone has to realize that steroids were a huge part of baseball for the last few decades. If we snub every deserving player tied to steroid use out of the Hall, then we would be left with 20 years of baseball vanishing into thin air.

I don't condone cheating at all, but I believe in a time when everyone around you was cheating, it is easy to see why so many players chose to do so.

Even if you were taking some kind of steroid, does that guarantee that you will hit a homerun every at bat? No, it means that you can recover faster from workouts and helps you play more games. Do steroids help your hand eye coordination and swing mechanics? No, hitting in baseball is all about reaction time, whether it's a curve ball or 90 mph fastball.

And why do the players get all the blame? What if I told you that during the years of the most rampant drug use, that Major League Baseball sat back and ignored the obvious notion of performance enhancing drugs.

One could argue that these seasons even saved baseball after the 1994 strike and season cancelation. That year saw a considerable increase in attendance and profits, while the MLB and commissioner Bud Selig both looked the other way when players like Bonds, Sosa and McGwire were breaking historic home run records.