PEDs - Do you care anymore?

[Ronsantorocks]

<!--quoteo(post=57823:date=Aug 14 2009, 09:01 AM:name=Coldneck)-->QUOTE (Coldneck @ Aug 14 2009, 09:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->My opinion of PEDs has evolved quite a bit. At first I took the traditionalist view and thought that Mark McGwire and Barry Bonds were monsters for cheating the game and history of baseball. I've thought a lot about this issue over the years and my view point has changed dramatically. I believe baseball players did what nearly all people would do in a immensely competitive environment that offered little consequence (at the time), and actually encouraged the use of PEDs. If there was a drug that was easily attainable, and would increase your performance, and offered the opportunity to dramatically increase your salary, would you take it? I would have to answer YES, emphatically. How can I judge those baseball players, many of whom have little to fall back on, that take PEDs if I would do the same? I can't. They did what people have done since the beginning of time. They took advantage of the things that were available to them to help them succeed.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Since the all of this steroid jazz started, I have not once cared about who takes them. Roids don't necessarily make any one a "better" ballplayer, but only make them stronger. Which results in homeruns, and what does everybody like to see? Homeruns. I agree with Coldneck that they are just using whats available to them to succeed. But I also think that if a record is broken or set by an "enhanced" player that they should get a separate record book or something. In the case of Barry Bonds, he's hi the most Homeruns by using PEDs, and Hank Aaron was the best Homerun hitter without PEDs. Hope that makes sense