B/R Community Debate: Why Are PEDs a Bigger Deal with Baseball?

William HungContributor IFebruary 11, 2009

I wanted to take a different approach from the rest of the B/R community since the story about A-Rod/A-Roid/A-Fraud broke. Instead of taking the route of writing about why Alex Rodriguez is another black eye for baseball (and I was so tempted to), I decided to try to start a debate through the comments section.

I got the idea through the e-mail from Rory from B/R requesting a story about steroids. I'm sure many of you got the same request.

The one point that I found a little disturbing was the fact that one of the tips for the column was on speculating which baseball players you suspect of taking performance enhancing drugs. Personally, that's something I would never ever want to do.

Having said that, I started to think, "why are steroids in baseball such a big deal compared to the NBA, NFL, and other major sports?" The issue has been raised before, but the arguments I have seen have been brief.

Jim Rome touched on it for about two minutes on Monday, and he basically said that fan expectations in football are different from baseball.

So I am hoping to get a spirited and not-so-violent debate among the b/r community on why there is so much attention to PED use in baseball versus other major sports.

Personally, I think the argument that statistics in baseball are so closely watched and historic does hold some water. I also think that the fact that books have been published on the matter, from Juiced to Game of Shadows has put baseball under a bigger spotlight.

I don't think there were any books published about Bill Romanowski's admitted steroid use.

I am very interested in what other people's thoughts are on the matter. So please comment on why PEDs in baseball get so much more attention than other sports. I'll highlight the most intriguing arguments in another column a few days from now.