Curt Schilling and Barry Bonds. Two names that evoke a myriad of emotions. Whether you like or dislike either, the media should love them both, as sports enthusiasts eat up the fodder they provide.
In the case of Schilling, his recent remarks on WEEI, a Boston sports talk-radio station, about Bonds being a “confessed cheater” has all in the media running to their outlets to feed their sheep. I am no different. But what makes this newsworthy? We all know, or at least assume, Bonds is guilty of cheating the game. He even admitted to taking the “cream” or “clear” albeit saying it was “unknowingly.” Maybe it was Curt adding the remarks about Bonds “cheating on his taxes” or “cheating on his wife” that has our attention.
However, I’m confused, is the story Bonds or Schilling? It should be Bonds, as he approaches baseball’s most cherished record. A record-breaking event that has the baseball elite looking the other way. Aaron has stated he will not be in attendance, and MLB Commissioner, Bud Selig, is looking to hide. Unless you’ve been devoured by the UFC phenomenon, you know the Bonds story all-too-well, so it appears that Schilling is the soup-de-jour.
While I understand why fans may dislike Schilling, as he often speaks his mind for self-promoting reasons, I’m confused as to why some of my media colleagues disdain him. On one hand, we hate it when athletes give scripted, canned, boring answers to our redundant questions – then we (or some) bury the athletes who provide their honest opinion and give us interesting material to write. To challenge their opinion is fine, but to attack them personally for providing it…is hypocritical.
In the case of Schilling on Bonds, I think it’s refreshing to hear a prominent player finally give an honest opinion. However, my challenge to Curt is – where were you in the Congressional Hearings? Did MLB or the Player’s Association put a muzzle on you? If so, fess-up.
Now that would be a story.
This was a well written post. I wonder what you mean about Curt’s role in the Congressional Hearings? I may have imagined it, but I thought he testified in the early going (March 2005). I know he hasn’t played that big a role since then, but Congress certainly hasn’t placed this on the front burner.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0503/17/se.01.html
Comment by Ben — May 9, 2007 @ 8:31 am
http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/03/17/steroids.baseball/
Schilling and the Congressional hearings? Are you kidding me? He was there. Do you not remember The Look he gave Ralph Palmero?
Comment by H — May 9, 2007 @ 8:32 am
Gee, I must have missed the bit in the Congressional hearings where Schilling defended Bonds. What I thought I heard was Schilling saying, yes, there is a steroids problem in baseball, but it’s not as widespread as Canseco claims. There is nothing in his remarks about Bonds which in anyway contradicts what he said to Congress. Nor do we have any hard evidence to suggest that Canseco was right and Schilling wrong. To the contrary, the results of the drug testing, and the numbers of players implicated by other sources since the hearings, both suggest that the total number of users is well below Canseco’s charges. I know it’s fashionable to bash Schilling for what he said at the hearings: what I remember is a man who seemed to be doing his best to tell the truth under oath, even when it meant backtracking from his own earlier remarks.
Comment by Madwoman — May 9, 2007 @ 8:38 am
Gil Vieira,
I agree with your comments on the subject of honest opinions vs. the media, but could you clarify your comment on the congressional hearings? I watched it live, and the only thing I remember from Schilling is just like what the previous posts mentioned. What more could he have done? I think he represented well.
Where’s the focus on “I’m not here to talk about the past, I’m here to talk about the future”? You talk about self serving, if that isn’t self serving (the “future” being his hopes of getting into the HOF, not the Pete Rose club), then I dont know what is.
Comment by pol_troop — May 9, 2007 @ 9:05 am
Yes, indeed, Curt was at the hearings. And, while Congressional hearings are about fact and not opinion, I had hoped for more factual information from Curt et al.
Comment by Gil — May 9, 2007 @ 9:15 am
at the hearings he said he did not know anything about steroids in baseball which was a lie because when he was on the Diamondbacks he lead a boycott of a steroid testing session because missing a test counts as a positive test and he thought if they all failed the test it would bring more attention to the steroid problem. Obviously he was aware of the problem them, he just must of forgot. I love the Red Sox and I schilling, hes a worthless piece of crap. Ive never heard Bonds admit to cheating on his wife, or cheating on taxes, and just because we heard that he admitted to accidentally using steroids once does not mean he admitted to using steroids like schilling is saying. Schilling is making it sound like he stood before America and said that he knowingly uses steroids all the time.
P.S Schilling no one cares what Boston’s 4 starters opinions are, just keep quiet and quit lying under oath.
Comment by James — May 9, 2007 @ 9:19 am
Gil,
I am a frequent listener of WEEI, and I’ve heard Schilling call in on many occasions. Actually, during the season he calls in every week to Dennis and Callahan. I heard his call yesterday. If you’re wondering, yes, I’m a Red Sox fan.
Although I was a little surprised that he “went there”, I eventually realized that that was just “Schilling being Schilling”; he’s never at a lack for words. As a somewhat intelligent fan, I think it’s refreshing to hear an athlete state his opinion, even if sometimes I don’t agree. In this case I do agree, and shame on some in the media for bashing Curt for having the courage to talk about the elephant in the room. The career HR record, when Bonds eventually sets it, will be tainted until someone like A-Rod breaks it.
Comment by deepsub — May 9, 2007 @ 9:27 am
James:
Do you mean to tell me, that you are going to believe, that a professional athlete, who lives off his body, is going to put random substances in-to and on his body without asking questions? Especially after the first few months where, I don’t know, parts of his body start growing at age 35? Barry knew what he was doing. Period. He hasn’t been “caught” because… well… that was the point! He wasn’t supposed to get caught. There is no test that can track the HGH. So of course he hasn’t been caught. And saying he “unknowingly” took steroids to a grand jury (which is in fact, as Curt Schilling stated, an admission that he took steroids) is the equivalent of telling your mom that a bird flew into the house and knocked over the cookie jar, when you damn well know it was you.
Barry Bonds is a bad guy. That’s all there is to it. Jason Giambi was able to deflect A LOT of negative criticism and harsh reaction from himself by using the media to his advantage, by “coming clean” even though he didn’t directly come clean. Bonds is too busy being spiteful, calling everyone a racist and hating writers for “what they put his Dad through” to realize he brings this all on himself. Like that time where he put his kid in the middle of an interview during his famous “I’m tired” BS rant, and then used him as a crutch to walk away from the interview. Classless. Raising questions about his taxes and cheating on his wife (all of which is documented, just do a little homework, it’s out there) just emphasizes the fact that Barry Bonds is a cheater and an all around bad dude. So screw him.
Unfortunately, he’s going to break the record and we’re all going to have to deal with it. I just wish some pitcher would grow a brass set in the mid section and hit him in the face. Seriously.
Comment by Jason — May 9, 2007 @ 9:46 am
You were hoping for more factual information? Unless Curt has receipts or test results, most information he could provide would be hearsay. Hearsay doesn’t even get past the jurors on Law&Order. What exactly were you hoping for?
Comment by Brian — May 9, 2007 @ 9:50 am
I echo what others are saying above, you might want to do your research before calling out Schilling regarding the Congressional hearings. He was right there providing answers unlike the suddenly non-english speaking Sammy Sosa or the finger pointing Palmeiro. Schilling, as much of a media whore that he is, is one of the most candid athletes in sports. He will always tell you what he’s thinking and you have to applaud that.
Comment by Jay — May 9, 2007 @ 10:12 am
Are you Schilling suck-ups kidding me - or yourselves? Schilling was a puppy-dog at those hearings. They we’re all full of Sh** and talked in half-truths…..
Comment by Bert — May 9, 2007 @ 10:52 am
Bonds will break the record. We all must deal with it. I wonder if Bonds were a nicer guy if fewer people would hate him? I mean it’s not as if he was the only guy to use the juice. But Bonds is an abrasive jerk so it’s fun to hate him. Schilling comes off as a bit self-wrighteous with his remarks too. How on earth can Schilling tell the difference between “good people” and “bad people?” It’s funny and makes for good reading.
Comment by anthony — May 9, 2007 @ 10:53 am
Schill did the right thing.. people need to stand up to this guy and with the only reason the pu$$ies on ESPN and not in agreement is because they are scared they will loose their job for calling a black man a cheat. As far as I’m concerened Curt is the only one with the balls to stand up and say something I commend him for it. His statements are facts… You, I and Barry all know this… He missed one thing though; Barry Bonds is a lier and cares more about himself than his fans and the sport. Managers need to stop pitching to this guy!
Comment by DreDAY — May 9, 2007 @ 10:54 am
Wow. Bonds is a jerk for sure. But Schilling is a blowhard.
Assuming that Schilling has always been faithful to his wife, doesn’t he know that many professional athletes have a problem with being faithful?
How does he know that someone in the Boston Redsox Clubhouse isn’t leaving a room key for a female “friend” while on the road. Come on, Curt.
Legitimately asking questions about Bonds and steroids is acceptable but sounding like a blowhard is not what the Redsox need right now. Sounds like Big Papi may have used the juice too. So what? It’s not like I don’t think he’s a great hitter.
Curt, shut up and pitch.
Comment by Jim — May 9, 2007 @ 11:37 am
Now Curt is backing off his comments in his Blog. Hey, Curt, stand up and speak your mind, or sit down and shut up!
Comment by Bert — May 9, 2007 @ 3:56 pm
Yea….Schilling was refreshing…he just backtracked on his comments in his blog today…..why doesn’t that guy just keep his pie hole shut….and use the time for more important things…like painting blood on his socks.
Comment by ernest t. — May 9, 2007 @ 6:47 pm
Ernest T. (the T obviously does not stand for Think). The bloody sock comment is getting pretty old, scrape up the million dollars to prove it or keep your own pie hole shut.
From 38pitches.com:
“Someone gave me a great idea to end this once and for all. No one will ever need to bring it up again. I’ll wager 1 million dollars to the charity of anyones choice, versus the same amount to ALS. If the blood on the sock is fake, I’ll donate a million dollars to that persons charity, if not they donate that amount to ALS.”
Comment by jackmack — May 9, 2007 @ 8:24 pm
Big Papi has the right attitude. Bonds is a bad ass. He is also a world class jerk. But so what? The man was a first ballot hall of famer (Curt Schilling admitted as much) before he took the steroids. So many ball players used juice it’s sickening. What can we do about it? Either we throw away all the records for the steroids era or we shut up about it. The earlier comment above saying “people need to stand-up to Bonds”..for what exactly? For using steroids? Fine, but he wasn’t the only one. If we “stand-up” to Bonds we have to look at everyone else in the roids era…
Comment by Jim — May 10, 2007 @ 10:57 am