Steroids: I Don't Really Think It Matters Anymore

It's possible that I am missing something of major importance here, and if I am, then I guess I will live with that, but why on earth should I care if Alex Rodriguez allegedly tested positive for steroids in 2003?

It was six years ago, prior to steroids being a banned substance in Major League Baseball. And if it was so important for us to know about it, why has this story been revealed now? Was Sports Illustrated hanging onto it in hopes that it might one day be relevant enough to make front page? Or, did they want to wait and see what would happen with Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens?

I understand that it's probable that A-Rod's name has just recently surfaced via this "source", but at this point I am one of those cynical types who just isn't surprised by this anymore. I'm not an A-Rod fan and I do not share in the opinion that he is the best player in baseball.

I think the media and—to an extent—some over-zealous baseball writers have decided to elevate him to that status. I'm not really all that impressed. I've seen other players, with similar numbers who don't get the praise that he does.

So this revelation that he may have used steroids does nothing to my opinion of MLB or A-Rod. Those opinions were sealed a long time ago and won't change any time soon.

I think MLB should start a new record book and call it the "Post-Steroids Era" and leave it at that.

Now, I am sure there are those who might say that there are some stats that may not have been influenced by the juice. So why negate a players first five or 10 years, by focusing only on the last four or six? Well, I agree with that to an extent, but without the final four or six seasons, some of these records may still be standing.

Mark McGwire may not have hit 62 home runs and broken Roger Maris' record—ditto Sammy Sosa. Barry Bonds may not have reached Hank Aaron's 755. It's possible, but not a given. The records of beloved players are what stand to be hurt by the perception of juiced players.

I do realize that the argument exists that steroids doesn't provide that much of an advantage. If it did, then why hasn't everyone tried it and had the results of a Bonds, Sosa or Clemens? Good point, but the perception that steroids and HGH help a player is not erased by the fact that it doesn't necessarily guarantee a player big time results.

Baseball is a great sport and one that has a wonderful history. However, it's time that the media stop bringing the skeletons out of the closet on all these star players. It is no longer relevant.

Baseball fans used to be able to tell the season was just around the corner because they could smell the fresh cut grass and see the news that pitchers and catchers were reporting. Now the season is marred by news of steroid use and overpaid players. It ruins the image of the sport and makes it look like a game of cheaters and money hogs.

Did A-Rod use? I have no idea and could care less if he did. If steroids are this big of a deal, then it's time for MLB to really do something about it and I don't mean just these arbitrary slaps on the wrist either. Make some long-term changes that make the risk greater than the reward.

Ban a player for whole seasons, strike records and season stats from the books, disallow Hall of Fame ballots to be cast for said player when eligible, take away pennants and championships, and allow owners to renege on contracts. Do something B-I-G!

Otherwise, the media and MLB, need to stop reporting the stories. Whether they realize it or not, they are killing the sport. They are killing their fans. They are killing their players.

Steroids is a big deal to a lot of people, I don't deny that. There are purists out there who take this very seriously, but at the end of the day, all a fan really wants to do is watch the game.

Planting seeds of doubt about a player's use of a substance doesn't help build the legacy of baseball. It tarnishes it.

In the long run, how is that good?